It's fine for any other state university to take on football, but somehow Connecticut can't do it because the program got really bad for five years. THIS ATTITUDE MAKES NO SENSE. Please stop saying we can't be competitive. We've literally done it before, and recently. Iowa and Kansas are not bigger than Connecticut, and they both have two state schools competing in power conferences.
Is the same true of Kansas, Duke, and North Carolina?
vanderbilt is in the SEC , enough said
It really is the biggest loser mentality i have ever seen in sports.
That's a bad attitude to have and really a loser's mindset. You can find many posts of mine being critical of UConn Football to the point of making fun of it just so I can cope. But having said that, UConn has been good at football when it was part of a big conference (Big East). To imply UConn Football cannot be good is flat out false.
100%. If UConn can be moderately competitive, I'm there and highly engaged. I don't need them to go 9-3 or 8-4 every year. It just got to the point for a while where they weren't watchable. It felt like I was watching big kids pick on little kids. And even then, I'd go sometimes. For me, the bare minimum is being able to move the ball some on offense and not getting gashed for 450+ yards every game on defense. I'm not asking a lot here.
#1 basketball conference is not a bad place to land
Kinda like the class dunce having a genius delusion.
Has it been 20 minutes?
94 with low humidity, a beautiful day
It's more than the Big East offers.
What does it offer that the Big East doesn’t? I’m genuinely curious I’m not trying to be a clown.
Better basketball conference, more money, more upside, football scheduling, potential football home, affiliated with similar institutions.
www.heartlandcollegesports.com
I'd like to think this fact pattern isn't lost on AD Dave and whoever is in the brain trust.
Money and a seat at the table.
So you're objecting to the financial terms of the deal before anyone knows what they are? Damn, I wish I was that smart.
So they’re paying us to get stomped on in football 4-5x a year, with minimal home games. Is the basketball conference that much better?
How much more money without football until early 2030’s? Will not be as much as you think.
Coming from a guy who buys 50 cases of Miller Lite for a “$2 beer night” I wouldn’t put it past him.
The 2031 full membership has to be guaranteed based on metrics fully within our control so they can’t keep moving the goal posts, pun intended. For instance, it can’t be averaging a certain number of wins or attendance per year. It has to be monetary like stadium expansion and other investments into football.
Big 12 holds the upper hand in these negotiations, zero chance we get a favorable deal. It’ll be a dog water offer.
And if the conference falls apart in 2029 what happens?
Hypothetical question................would we be getting "X" number of BIG 12 games a year as we ramp up the program??? That would be important as well as increase interest and tix sales
What if it doesn't?
You think Big 12 is going to give us ~4 home games a year vs their teams? No way they travel out here for that.
Gee, we should have never left the Yankee conference with that poor attitude.
how is that a concern? the BIG10 tv deal expires in 2029 but they have never shown interest in poaching any BIG12 teams. the BIG12 deal expires in 2031. the SEC tv deal expires in 2033. all 3 conferences will have renewed their tv deals before the ACC tv deal expires in 2036. If any conference falls apart it will be the ACC since the networks dont wanna spend any more money on sports inventory. that's exactly what just happened with the PAC. the BIG, SEC, and BIG12 had all just renewed their deals and there was no money left for them.