UConn In Discussions With ACC? | Page 6 | The Boneyard
.

UConn In Discussions With ACC?

Status
Not open for further replies.
junglehusky said:
And let's take 5-10 years to nurture this UMass rivalry while they improve to MAC level football, instead of having an instant classic with BC who most of the fanbase already hates.
Expand ...

Well it is probably the right call since UMass is the only program that isn't afraid to play us. It's tough to fill an empty stadium and that is what we'll have if we are waiting for a game BCU.
 
CL82 said:
Well it is probably the right call since UMass is the only program that isn't afraid to play us. It's tough to fill an empty stadium and that is what we'll have if we are waiting for a game BCU.
Expand ...
Carl was (I think) trying to argue that we should turn down an ACC offer partially because we could schedule UMass as a rivalry game out of conference instead of having BC as a rivalry in conference.

I'm not opposed to playing UMass on a semi-regular basis, as a replacement for other MAC teams on the schedule. But to have a potential game with UMass as a factor in determining UConn's conference alignment is a joke.
 
Carl's assertion about national recruiting is misguided. Recruiting has been and remains a "regional " phenomena. Witness almost any college football roster. Penn State which has been the big boy on the block in the East for decades is a good example. Fully 80-85 players on its roster come from the New England(2) and Mid Atlantic States with a handful from Texas/Ohio. I doubt having such a large contingent from its base area has changed much over the years It doesnt matter what conference you are in, Schools in that region compete largely for the players of that region. There are only a handful of schools that recruit nationally and a few of those are the service acadamies. Please dont reference our Qb reruit from Tx of whom Im very happy about getting becaus as of this date we are his sole offer at this level.
 
Recruiting may be predominantly regional but regional players want to play in a program with national visibility. Oregon, Stanford, Boise, Houston, TCU, etc have upgraded recruiting substantially since getting into the top 25 with regularity.
 
pj said:
Recruiting may be predominantly regional but regional players want to play in a program with national visibility. Oregon, Stanford, Boise, Houston, TCU, etc have upgraded recruiting substantially since getting into the top 25 with regularity.
Expand ...

Yes , thats true, you want to become a (the)preffered football destination in your area.
 
Duncan Idaho said:
Carl's assertion about national recruiting is misguided. Recruiting has been and remains a "regional " phenomena. Witness almost any college football roster. Penn State which has been the big boy on the block in the East for decades is a good example. Fully 80-85 players on its roster come from the New England(2) and Mid Atlantic States with a handful from Texas/Ohio. I doubt having such a large contingent from its base area has changed much over the years It doesnt matter what conference you are in, Schools in that region compete largely for the players of that region. There are only a handful of schools that recruit nationally and a few of those are the service acadamies. Please dont reference our Qb reruit from Tx of whom Im very happy about getting becaus as of this date we are his sole offer at this level.
Expand ...

the world is changing duncan. changing very rapidly. Thanks for bringing up the service academies. Having a conference that can competitively recruit nationally - you think that's not an important thing for the Big East conference moving forward? I kind of do.
 
PP might agree about recruiting nationally. But PP isn't going to make the decision, Susan Herbst and the trustees will (if we're invited somewhere) and they have bigger fish to fry than football recruiting.
 
We should just play UMass almost every year to fulfill the MAC requirement for the OOC schedule. We were playing Temple and Buffalo. So why not UMass?
 
Butchy said:
We should just play UMass almost every year to fulfill the MAC requirement for the OOC schedule. We were playing Temple and Buffalo. So why not UMass?
Expand ...

If you're going to play MAC teams, and we should be playing one or two, better to play one where our fans can get to road games. Between a return game in Kalamazoo, as we're doing this year, or Buffalo, where we played last year, and the Razor, I would think that's a very easy decision.
 
businesslawyer said:
If you're going to play MAC teams, and we should be playing one or two, better to play one where our fans can get to road games. Between a return game in Kalamazoo, as we're doing this year, or Buffalo, where we played last year, and the Razor, I would think that's a very easy decision.
Expand ...

Agree 1500% UMass is perfect for us. It's practically a home game. I wish we could play UMass and Army every year.
 
whaler11 said:
I understand you played for him and can't be thoughtful about this. Tom Jackson was not a good head coach. He had almost no success and Holtz and Edsall were both so much better it isn't even up for discussion.

We get it. Edsall didn't kiss the alumni player's asses. Randy Edsall may go 0-12 at Maryland this year. Tom Jackson couldn't carry his jock.

Tom Jackson stayed employed because the University did not care about the football program. It's that simple.
Expand ...


Whaler - stick to the 90s and beyond, you have no idea what you're talking about.
 
businesslawyer said:
If you're going to play MAC teams, and we should be playing one or two, better to play one where our fans can get to road games. Between a return game in Kalamazoo, as we're doing this year, or Buffalo, where we played last year, and the Razor, I would think that's a very easy decision.
Expand ...
I can't really disagree with that in concept. I think it is a bit early though to make that decision. If UMass becomes another Buffalo we might not care to be playing them every year. On the other hand if they build a solid MAC program, it would make sense. When we made a long term (I think 10 years) deal with Buffalo, that seemed to make sense...two Eastern schools both just upgrading to 1A football. Obviously we've gone in different directions since that time and it no longer makes sense. I think at the time, the feeling was that UB would at least keep pace with other MAC schools and even if UCONN pulled ahead in development, it wouldn't be such a significant spread. So before signing a long term deal with UMass, and I'm not fundamentally opposed to the idea, I would want to wait a few years to see how they are going. If they seem to be progressing relatively well, I'd make the deal, if not, I would tend to make it an occasional game alternated with Buffalo, Ohio, a directional Michigan, maybe a CUSA opponent or even a Sunbelt for variety.
 
UConn, UMass and BC should all be playing each other regularly.

In people's zealous need to knock me, somehow the conclusion has been reached that I'd rather be playing UMass than BC. I've never said that. I'd like to see both on the schedule regularly.

I simply don't want to be part of the ACC. That doesn't mean we can't schedule BC.

But it's ok. I've got a thick skin, and I'm working on Q-Tip for next saturday.
 
freescooter said:
If UMass becomes another Buffalo we might not care to be playing them every year. On the other hand if they build a solid MAC program, it would make sense.
Expand ...

UMASS cannot become another Buffalo. UMASS is a geographic and historic rival, Buffalo is not and never will be. It seems very likely that UMASS will become a solid MAC program, I would not bet against them.
 
Carl Spackler said:
Whaler - stick to the 90s and beyond, you have no idea what you're talking about.
Expand ...

No problem. Tom Jackson after 1990.

3-8
5-6
6-5
'resign'

Edsall won a BCS conference twice. Skip Holtz took over Jackson's team and went to the playoffs in 5 years that Jackson never made in 10.

I'm sure you can tie Carm, Seward's Folly, the Amistad and Thomas Hooker into a 600 word post on how Tom Jackson was a visionary who predicted today's reality - most people would say when you go 13-14 in your mediocre conference at the end of your run at the school with the most resources in the league you probably weren't very good - but don't let the facts get in the way.
 
metsfan2323 said:
UMASS cannot become another Buffalo. UMASS is a geographic and historic rival, Buffalo is not and never will be. It seems very likely that UMASS will become a solid MAC program, I would not bet against them.
Expand ...
Not saying they won't, but I am saying that it is too soon to be certain. I think rivalries where one team has no chance year in-year out are not really rivalries. They very quickly lose their momentum even if they continue being played. Though it has been discontinued, LSU-Tulane was an example, Tulane not having one since 1982 and only 4 times since 1950. In the last 15 years there That is what you want to avoid it seems to me. And so I would want to see the direction of the UMass program before signing a long term deal with them.
 
Yeah, and to further illustrate scooter's point recall what happened with the "U-Game" on the hardwood that Dickie V was shilling for. Turns out Umass hoops with Bruiser Flint wasn't the same as with Squid and Camby. You can't force these things.
 
Carl Spackler said:
You have any idea who turned around the Virginia Tech football program in a heartbeat about 15 years ago?

I didn't think so.
Expand ...

Beating Texas in the Sugar Bowl, finished in top ten. Got Michael Vick after that...
 
junglehusky said:
Yeah, and to further illustrate scooter's point recall what happened with the "U-Game" on the hardwood that Dickie V was shilling for. Turns out Umass hoops with Bruiser Flint wasn't the same as with Squid and Camby. You can't force these things.
Expand ...

Nor can you over price them, which was a big part of the problem with the rediculosuly named"U-Game".
 
claver2010 said:
My butler's butler.

Trust me, Tuesday
Expand ...
I only ask because it's not being discussed at all on your board and you haven't been a source of realignment info in the past. Since I'm inherently skeptical about any realignment news, I won't believe anything until I see it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
288
Guests online
3,589
Total visitors
3,877
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
164,532
Messages
4,400,213
Members
10,214
Latest member
illini2013


.
..
Top Bottom