While that may be the case, there was a 0% chance UConn would've gained admission to the ACC at the time Perkins would've been lobbying, presumably 02-03. We weren't even a full 1A member at that time, so any lobbying would've had to be for some kind of down the road pipe dream. That said, I've always felt that lawsuit was dumb and ridiculous - though it was as much spearheaded by others in the BE, including VT and Pitt, as it was UConn and the state.
Unfortunately, UConn had Hathway as an AD from 2003 - 2011 who did nothing to position UConn for the split that everyone saw coming. If UConn had someone like Warde as AD instead I have to believe that UConn would be in the ACC or B1G today.
If UConn had someone like Warde as AD instead (of Hathaway) I have to believe that UConn would be in the ACC or B1G today.
He is great a DC, but lets not fool ourselves. His defense are quickly solved with a quick passing game. Remember Western Michigan when they came into the Rent? Their team would go on to win 4 games. They marched up and down the field and scored at will on us. Time after time we blitzed and the QB got the ball in the air before we got there.My concern as well I stated earlier. We need to fix offensive line issues against his blitz happy defense. Glad we get a few years for the rematch at home. Hopefully these issues will be fixed
How about the Civil Lawsuit, to compliment the rivalry formerly known as the Civil Conflict (renamed ConFLiCT).Hmm, so what's the trophy for this one?
-the Lobster Pot
-the Chowder Pot
-New England Championship
-the Packie (I kid)
Hmm, so what's the trophy for this one?
-the Lobster Pot
-the Chowder Pot
-New England Championship
-the Packie (I kid)
It's good for us and good for them. It's foolish that it took so long.The key of course, is the resumption of BC vs. UConn, which will start next November at Alumni Stadium. The Eagles will return the trip in 2017, take a few years off and then resume the schedule on an annual basis.
Oh, it's on!!!!
Leadership is about making tough choices. BC leaders should have made the choice, they used Montgomery as a justification. What else could he say? BC was wrong. All or nothing.BC did indeed consider boycotting that Sugar Bowl .Montgomery demanded however that BC go without him. He insisted on this reapeatedly according to the book published on this. He was a real hero, and said his players, coaches earned the right to go to the Sugar Bowl, and one player should not deny them that opportunity to play for the National Title. Montgomery's request was the deciding factor to go or not according to the book . Montgomery was BC extra motivation there at the Sugar Bowl vs. #1 Tennessee. That said, there is legitimate disagreements among the BC community today as to whether or not BC should have gone to that Sugar Bowl back in 1940 , or forfeited the game ( and their undefeated season ) by boycotting it. Montgomery for his part, was pleased BC went, and more pleased they won, and pleased again the team gave him the winning game ball when they came back. His family was honored at Alumni Stadium awhile back. He is remembered well at BC and is considered a real hero for his selfless act in 1940.
-Cider Jug (besides Chowder pot, this is my favorite)
-Cobbler Tin
-Shad Plate
-Burger Steam Tray with Baked Beans
The possibilities are endless.
That's a pretty good assessment of the situation. Welcome aboard Grant...it took you long enough.Grant just posted this on the rivalry renewed
http://www.bcinterruption.com/bosto...uconn-huskies-is-happening-and-its-about-time