UConn/ACC | Page 3 | The Boneyard

UConn/ACC

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dooley said:
Actually, no. Any school other than UCONN --> P5 conference displeases me!
Expand ...
You know I like and understand you're feelings...and its not just you but ImaBelievers post set me off !! After all Dooley in the end were all simply fans!! You know Im a believer in you guys but still just a fan lol.
 
CoastAtlantic said:
If I had to guess, RU -> B1G displeases you more than Louisville -> ACC.
Expand ...
Why would it? We didnt take anyones spot? Compare a backwater type school to the #1 media market and longtime candidate to johnnycomelately Metro? Heck the ACC knew before SU/Pitt where RU was going! Why do you think they left for the ACC? Honestly I respect how far the "ville" came in a short timeframe in perception but agitaters like some of these ACC posters are why no one cares for that secondary conference with in the SEC's footprint!
 
NickyNewark said:
You know I like and understand you're feelings...and its not just you but ImaBelievers post set me off !! After all Dooley in the end were all simply fans!! You know Im a believer in you guys but still just a fan lol.
Expand ...

Sorry Nicky, I was feeling punchy from the exchange with ImABeliever. In all honesty, I do think Rutgers had to be added first before UCONN to lockdown NYC. Rutgers brought more cable boxes and is already AAU. Plus better NJ recruiting grounds for football. I don't think a NYC lockdown is complete without UCONN though.
 
Last edited:
Dooley said:
Sorry Nicky, I was feeling punchy from the exchange with ImABeliever. In all honesty, I do think Rutgers had to be added first before UCONN to lockdown NYC. Rutgers brought more cable boxes and is already AAU. Plus better NJ recruiting grounds for football. I don't think a NYC lockdown is complete with UCONN though.
Expand ...
You know Im with you guys there!! I'm just trying to "keep it real" lol...like I said I completely understand the frustration and usually hold my tongue but like you was incited by "Imabeliever" posts fresh in my mind.
 
NickyNewark said:
Why would it? We didnt take anyones spot? Compare a backwater type school to the #1 media market and longtime candidate to johnnycomelately Metro? Heck the ACC knew before SU/Pitt where RU was going! Why do you think they left for the ACC? Honestly I respect how far the "ville" came in a short timeframe in perception but agitaters like some of these ACC posters are why no one cares for that secondary conference with in the SEC's footprint!
Expand ...

I actually agree that RU wasn't going to the ACC. It was either the B1G or stay in the American. The real question was who would accompany them. They found their golden ticket through the Terps deciding that associating with midwestern schools was the better deal. I would have thought Mizzou and Rutgers would have been a better deal for the B1G but that's an outsider's view. UL or WVU, UConn and UMD should have solidfied the ACC but for the small-minded folks running some institutions.
 
CoastAtlantic said:
I actually agree that RU wasn't going to the ACC. It was either the B1G or stay in the American. The real question was who would accompany them. They found their golden ticket through the Terps deciding that associating with midwestern schools was the better deal. I would have thought Mizzou and Rutgers would have been a better deal for the B1G but that's an outsider's view. UL or WVU, UConn and UMD should have solidfied the ACC but for the small-minded folks running some institutions.
Expand ...

In all honesty, I don't see a problem with the ACC adding UCONN right now. They have ND as a partial 15th member already. They can supplement football schedules between the two. If that's an issue, they could add UCONN and Cincinnati or UCF. Football schools would be happy with OH recruiting and Cincinnati (or more FL recruiting and UCF); hoops schools (other than Cuse) would be happy with UCONN.
 
.-.
Dooley said:
In all honesty, I don't see a problem with the ACC adding UCONN right now. They have ND as a partial 15th member already. They can supplement football schedules between the two. If that's an issue, they could add UCONN and Cincinnati or UCF. Football schools would be happy with OH recruiting and Cincinnati (or more FL recruiting and UCF); hoops schools (other than Cuse) would be happy with UCONN.
Expand ...

Their problem would be that ESPN has no incentive to up the conference payout for the add, as they already own UConn's rights for a song ... so the ACC could lose per-school revenue. Also, there is still the residual politics (footballs schools wary of giving up voting power to basketball schools, turf wars in the northeast).

In principle I agree, it should be as easy to schedule 15 + ND as 14+ND, and conference championship game deregulation may permit the add. We'll see. Maybe the state has leverage over ESPN to get them to pay the ACC; maybe the ACC recognizes the strategic value of locking the B1G out of New England.
 
Dooley said:
In all honesty, I don't see a problem with the ACC adding UCONN right now. They have ND as a partial 15th member already. They can supplement football schedules between the two. If that's an issue, they could add UCONN and Cincinnati or UCF. Football schools would be happy with OH recruiting and Cincinnati (or more FL recruiting and UCF); hoops schools (other than Cuse) would be happy with UCONN.
Expand ...

The ONLY shot we have at the ACC is IF ND decides to join fulltime which may never happen and will certainly not be happening in the short term.

The ACC is never adding another Florida school as long as it has FSU & Miami and the "fertile" recruiting grounds of Ohio get Cinci in as a last resort if the ACC implodes and the conference is on a death bed with UNC, UVA, FSU, Clemson & others having already left
 
pj said:
Their problem would be that ESPN has no incentive to up the conference payout for the add, as they already own UConn's rights for a song ... so the ACC could lose per-school revenue. Also, there is still the residual politics (footballs schools wary of giving up voting power to basketball schools, turf wars in the northeast).

In principle I agree, it should be as easy to schedule 15 + ND as 14+ND, and conference championship game deregulation may permit the add. We'll see. Maybe the state has leverage over ESPN to get them to pay the ACC; maybe the ACC recognizes the strategic value of locking the B1G out of New England.
Expand ...

bobbyinaz said:
The ONLY shot we have at the ACC is IF ND decides to join fulltime which may never happen and will certainly not be happening in the short term.

The ACC is never adding another Florida school as long as it has FSU & Miami and the "fertile" recruiting grounds of Ohio get Cinci in as a last resort if the ACC implodes and the conference is on a death bed with UNC, UVA, FSU, Clemson & others having already left
Expand ...

I agree with both of your points. ESPiN owns our rights for pennies on the dollar. I think an ACC move would be pre-emptive to a potential B1G move for UCONN and/or B12 move for Cincinnati or UCF. CR is still about survival. It seems silly for the ACC to destroy their east coast conference competition and leave the biggest dog out there for other conferences to scoop up.

If we have to wait on ND, then we will never get into a conference. They are going to do everything possible to keep their independence and sweetheart deals. I just think that a football schedule with a "part time member" is a bit disjointed and could be leveled by adding another full-time member.
 
Dooley said:
In all honesty, I don't see a problem with the ACC adding UCONN right now. They have ND as a partial 15th member already. They can supplement football schedules between the two. If that's an issue, they could add UCONN and Cincinnati or UCF. Football schools would be happy with OH recruiting and Cincinnati (or more FL recruiting and UCF); hoops schools (other than Cuse) would be happy with UCONN.
Expand ...
ESPN has two incencentives.
Both involved Fox.
The contract with the AAC is short term and written at a time when it looked like the AAC might fall apart.
If the AAC continues having success the next contract will be a lot more competitive. It would be cheaper to give One or two teams a bump than getting in a bidding war with Fox.
A big east B1g,AAC alliance with be a significant BB coup.
The other scenario involves UConn to the B1G and a significant threat to the ACC
An extra 20mm is peanuts
 
Last edited:
Dooley said:
I agree with both of your points. ESPiN owns our rights for pennies on the dollar. I think an ACC move would be pre-emptive to a potential B1G move for UCONN and/or B12 move for Cincinnati or UCF. CR is still about survival. It seems silly for the ACC to destroy their east coast conference competition and leave the biggest dog out there for other conferences to scoop up.

If we have to wait on ND, then we will never get into a conference. They are going to do everything possible to keep their independence and sweetheart deals. I just think that a football schedule with a "part time member" is a bit disjointed and could be leveled by adding another full-time member.
Expand ...



What "sweetheart deals"?? ND makes less TV money as an independent than if it would join the Big Ten. Purdue and Indiana make more TV money than ND right now.

ND's deal with the ACC is that it shares no ACC football money and keeps the NBC money. The NBC deal paid ND $15 million before its renewal a year or so ago. Nobody knows how much the new deal is worth per year. I hope that it is $25 million, but it is likely less than that.

ND only gets a share of the ACC minor bowl money if ND plays in one (it all goes into one common pool, then). If ND doesn't play in one, it gets no ACC bowl money.

I do agree with you on your main point, though. ND wants to stay independent for reasons other than TV money (brand, exposure, recruiting, school identity, etc..) and will not likely join a football conference unless the playoffs are limited to conference champs only.
 
TerryD said:
What "sweetheart deals"?? ND makes less TV money as an independent than if it would join the Big Ten. Purdue and Indiana make more TV money than ND right now.

ND's deal with the ACC is that it shares no ACC football money and keeps the NBC money. The NBC deal paid ND $15 million before its renewal a year or so ago. Nobody knows how much the new deal is worth per year. I hope that it is $25 million, but it is likely less than that.

ND only gets a share of the ACC minor bowl money if ND plays in one (it all goes into one common pool, then). If ND doesn't play in one, it gets no ACC bowl money.

I do agree with you on your main point, though. ND wants to stay independent for reasons other than TV money (brand, exposure, recruiting, school identity, etc..) and will not likely join a football conference unless the playoffs are limited to conference champs only.
Expand ...









TerryD-3_zps66223252.jpg
 
.-.
StevieDude said:
God you're an idiot
Expand ...


So, you think Cleanface adds a lot to the discussion, eh?

He takes unprovoked shots at ND all of the time. Once in a while, I fire one back. I never start any discussion here (or anywhere) that is negative to any school.
 
Last edited:
TerryD said:
So, you think Cleanface adds a lot to the discussion, eh?

He takes unprovoked shots at ND all of the time. Once in a while, I fire one back. I never start any discussion here (or anywhere) that is negative to any school.
Expand ...
Grow a set
 
huh?

I think that the ACC is set...unless the Irish do the unthinkable. And there just doesn't look like there will be any disincentive for the Irish in remaining independent.

The ACC tie in was a win-win for the ACC and ND....but the Irish are good about seeing that their part of a win-win is spelled with a capital W.
 
.-.
AZHuskiePop said:
The other scenario involves UConn to the B1G and a significant threat to the ACC
An extra 20mm is peanuts
Expand ...

I just don't see UConn to the B1G. Adding three schools in the last five years is an extremely radical departure from where they've been historically, and they felt it was forced on them by circumstances elsewhere. However, all things being equal, they will always prefer stasis to chaos.
 
Uconn’s best chance for a p5 invite continues to be the big12, but even that looks unlikely at the moment.
 
billybud said:
huh?

I think that the ACC is set...unless the Irish do the unthinkable. And there just doesn't look like there will be any disincentive for the Irish in remaining independent.

The ACC tie in was a win-win for the ACC and ND....but the Irish are good about seeing that their part of a win-win is spelled with a capital W.
Expand ...
The biggest shock for me is how well Notre Dame came into the ACC with non-football this year and dusted all of us. I had no idea that the ND non-revenue sports were this good as a whole. UVA had one of our better years in the Director's Cup and still finished behind ND. I'll say that there is no question that ND is a good fit. David Teel breaks down the year:

http://www.dailypress.com/sports/teel-blog/dp-teel-time-acc-review-1314,0,2192861,full.post

UConn finished in the Top 65 at 57, which is definitely P5 level. And with the basketball championships being in revenue sports, there is no question UConn belongs in a P5. The decision to take Pitt over UConn certainly wasn't because of athletic success. Pitt did 29 spots lower and needs work. I haven't followed UConn in the Director's Cup over the years, so I don't know if 57 is a normal showing or not. I'd like to see UConn in the ACC if the opportunity presents itself with full understanding that many here prefer the Big Ten.
 
The Director's Cup is useless indicator of athletic success. The fact that it rewards sports with very few participants and very little competition equally with sports played widely at virtually every university is pathetic. A National Championship in Mens Basketball gets the same number of points as Bowling. A team that reaches the Final Four can end up with the same number of points as the fourth best bowling team. This is not to take away from the national champion of a particular sport, because they were the best. However, allowing schools down the list that really weren't that good to accumulate points toward the "cup" is silly. In fact, in many instances, a school can be the worst in the country at their respective sport and still rack up points. Look at D1 Fencing, there's about 20-25 schools that participate. Let's say you place dead last (25th). No worries, you get points! Any legitimate ranking should be weighted with regard to number of participants and/or schools participating. The Capital One Cup is not perfect, but at least there's some credit given to sports that are more widely contested.
 
When shooting is basically the same value as winning a hoop title, you're dealing with a dogcrap metric.

The Capital One thing covers what counts.
 
Fishy said:
When shooting is basically the same value as winning a hoop title, you're dealing with a dogcrap metric.

The Capital One thing covers what counts.
Expand ...


I agree.

Here are the men's and women's Capital One Cup final rankings:

http://www.capitalonecup.com/


MEN'S CUP STANDINGS

SCHOOL POINTS

1. Notre Dame 98.5
2. Oregon 92
3. Florida 86
4. Virginia 77
5. Florida State 68
5. USC 68
7. Connecticut 66
8. Duke 60.5
9. Maryland 60
9. North Dakota State 60
9. Vanderbilt 60
12. Michigan State 51



WOMEN'S CUP STANDINGS

SCHOOL POINTS

1. Florida 152
2. UCLA 110
3. Stanford 106
4. Maryland 94
5. Texas A&M 89
6. Connecticut 80
6. Oregon 80
6. Texas 80
9. Penn State 72
10. North Carolina 68
11. Georgia 62
12. Virginia 56
 
.-.
TerryD said:
I agree.

Here are the men's and women's Capital One Cup final rankings:

http://www.capitalonecup.com/


MEN'S CUP STANDINGS

SCHOOL POINTS

1. Notre Dame 98.5
2. Oregon 92
3. Florida 86
4. Virginia 77
5. Florida State 68
5. USC 68
7. Connecticut 66
8. Duke 60.5
9. Maryland 60
9. North Dakota State 60
9. Vanderbilt 60
12. Michigan State 51



WOMEN'S CUP STANDINGS

SCHOOL POINTS

1. Florida 152
2. UCLA 110
3. Stanford 106
4. Maryland 94
5. Texas A&M 89
6. Connecticut 80
6. Oregon 80
6. Texas 80
9. Penn State 72
10. North Carolina 68
11. Georgia 62
12. Virginia 56
Expand ...
We had a great year, but we have a lot of great years. it looks like Maryland has a much better athletic program than all their former brothers in the ACC want to give them credit for. Where's that juggernaut from Kentucky?
 
itgoeslike said:
The Director's Cup is useless indicator of athletic success. The fact that it rewards sports with very few participants and very little competition equally with sports played widely at virtually every university is pathetic. A National Championship in Mens Basketball gets the same number of points as Bowling. A team that reaches the Final Four can end up with the same number of points as the fourth best bowling team. This is not to take away from the national champion of a particular sport, because they were the best. However, allowing schools down the list that really weren't that good to accumulate points toward the "cup" is silly. In fact, in many instances, a school can be the worst in the country at their respective sport and still rack up points. Look at D1 Fencing, there's about 20-25 schools that participate. Let's say you place dead last (25th). No worries, you get points! Any legitimate ranking should be weighted with regard to number of participants and/or schools participating. The Capital One Cup is not perfect, but at least there's some credit given to sports that are more widely contested.
Expand ...

The Capital One Cup is nice. They give a $200k scholarship at the end. It's an ESPN created thing that represents what ESPN want to promote.

But the Gold Standard in College Athletics is the Learfield Sports Director's Cup sponsored by the National Association of Collegiate Director's of Athletics. Each college team can submit up to 20 sports programs in their athletics departments to compete, men's and women's. If you want to submit more widely contested sports like basketball, that's fine. If you want to submit ice hockey, which hardly anyone competes in, that's fine too. Submit your top 20, and good luck. It's the fairest. And it's the one widely accepted in athletics departments across the country similar to USN&WR in academics.
 
btstimpy said:
The Capital One Cup is nice. They give a $200k scholarship at the end. It's an ESPN created thing that represents what ESPN want to promote.

But the Gold Standard in College Athletics is the Learfield Sports Director's Cup sponsored by the National Association of Collegiate Director's of Athletics. Each college team can submit up to 20 sports programs in their athletics departments to compete, men's and women's. If you want to submit more widely contested sports like basketball, that's fine. If you want to submit ice hockey, which hardly anyone competes in, that's fine too. Submit your top 20, and good luck. It's the fairest. And it's the one widely accepted in athletics departments across the country similar to USN&WR in academics.
Expand ...

I'm familiar with the product. The problem is that it is anything but fair. Learfield is also antiquated and is quickly becoming irrelevant. It is easy to see why some schools would submit fencing or woman's bowling as part of their 20 sport mix—you get points no matter how bad you are. For instance, Temple finished in the bottom half nationally in fencing, but they received 51 points, or about half of what UConn received for winning the NC in basketball. At the same time, the 150th best team in the 300 team D1 basketball receive no points (which is they way it should be). It artificially favors schools that perform poorly in uncontested sports. As I stated above, they need to proportion points based upon the number of participants and it should be weighted toward teams that win championships or finish in the top tier. Teams that finish outside of the top 10% of their respective sport should receive no points.

People can judge for themselves. Look up a particular obscure sport; see where a particularly bad school at the sport placed; and look how many points they racked up.

http://thedirectorscup.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Apr24DIRelease.pdf

It needs to change or it will simply become more and more ignored.
 
Last edited:
Actually...no one cares about women's sports, Olympic sports, and assorted special interest sports like Rifle, volleyball, sand volleyball, etc...

It is football...three lengths behind, basketball....Everything else is clustered around the starting gate.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,343
Messages
4,566,090
Members
10,467
Latest member
MrDownunder


Top Bottom