UConn starting to get respect. | The Boneyard
.

UConn starting to get respect.

BlueandOG said:
If we end the regular season at 9-3 with wins over two ACC teams, we will play in a good bowl against an interesting opponent. Plus we'll get attention from the P4 again - although I am happy with the status quo for now.
Expand ...
I don't think anything will happen until the ACC situation shakes out. Too much uncertainty for the ACC to make a move and the big 12 will look to see if they can snatch an existing P4 program out of the ACC before they look to us. (And, of course, the P2 have no interest in us.)

We suffer from the perception that we will always be available. It's not wrong. We are available to the first P4 to make an offer.
 
Yeah, during th
blue93 said:
It does, but I’m choosing to count our blessings. A 7-3 season was unthinkable not long ago, so I’m soaking up every second of the revival.
Expand ...
Yeah, especially when we're not that far removed from the last couple years of the Diaco era and then disaster that was Edsall 2.0.
 
Waquoit said:
The P4 is shunning us, not because they think UConn will stink; it's because they know UConn will be good.
Expand ...
The P4 are "shunning us" because no media partner is willing to pony up enough to pay for our share of Conference media distribution plus an additional amount to be paid to every other conference team. If ESPN called up the ACC and said we will increase what we pay you enough to pay for Connecticut's media share plus enough to add one or $2 million per each school. They would have a vote and bring us in.

No one is keeping us out because they hate us, or because they're afraid of us. They are keeping us out because adding us does not make them more money, and, in fact, would, potentially, dilute their individual shares. The problem is, as conferences grow, adding enough money to make a material difference to each individual school becomes more expensive.

We are in a tough spot. We need a dramatic change either in conference membership or in the existing payment paradigm for us to bring enough value to get an offer.
 
Last edited:
ctbro1999 said:
The fact we could easily be 10-0 currently hurts a little bit.
Expand ...
It does but the law of averages kicks in. we could have just as easily lost to Duke down the stretch. I think the odds were more likely we would have lost to duke than cuse, delaware and rice.
 
sounds weird but i'd take our 7-3 over a 9-1 with a duke loss.
why? because the duke win proved something that none of those other wins could, even a theoretical syracuse win.

a rice & delaware win would be just another meaningless G6 win against someone no one cares about.
So, we're not perfect yet; we were going to lose some games.

I think we're ok where we are.
 
ctbro1999 said:
The fact we could easily be 10-0 currently hurts a little bit.
Expand ...
I believe and it's been expressed by a number of folks here, that the 3 OT losses is what led us to the big win Saturday. Combo of learning how to win, I've had enough and I'm not going to take it any more combining for a refuse to lose moment after Duke took the lead for the last time.
 
If we can win the last 2, we'd pretty much hit my pre-season record prediction, however, the losses weren't quite against the teams I expected.
 
Jetskies said:
sounds weird but i'd take our 7-3 over a 9-1 with a duke loss.
why? because the duke win proved something that none of those other wins could, even a theoretical syracuse win.
Expand ...
Objective observers would note that Syracuse with Angelli was a much, much different team than with the backups they've tried... arguably the best (given it was on the road) opponent UConn has faced.

Of course, most people aren't objective and don't go past the headlines... meaning that the Duke win is much, much bigger than the theoretical Syracuse win at this point.
 
CL82 said:
The P4 are "shunning us" because no media partner is willing to pony up enough to pay for our share of Conference media distribution plus an additional amount to be paid to every other conference team. If ESPN called up the ACC and said we will increase what we pay you enough to pay for Connecticut's media share plus enough to add one or $2 million per each school. They would have a vote and bring us in.

No one is keeping us out because they hate us, or because they're afraid of us. They are keeping us out because adding us does not make them more money, and, in fact, would, potentially, dilute their individual shares. The problem is, as conferences grow, adding enough money to make a material difference to each individual school becomes more expensive.

We are in a tough spot. We need a dramatic change either in conference membership or in the existing payment paradigm for us to bring enough value to get an offer.
Expand ...
Except this isn't true.

When Brett Yormark used Navigate (Chicago-based consulting firm) for the Big12's evaluation of UConn, it showed that we WOULD add the value to make a "material difference".

We weren't kept out because of value. We were kept out by a few schools who ultimately didn't want us in, likely based on geographic or cultural concerns...
 
Last edited:
Additional info for the skeptics:

www.espn.com

Big 12's discussions to add UConn have stalled

The Big 12's conversations about potentially adding UConn as a member have stalled.
www.espn.com www.espn.com

"Per sources, the talks stalled and ended up being tabled because of the timing. With the initial season of the 16-team league underway and schools facing uncertainty in the House v. NCAA case as well as looming decisions on revenue share, adding membership simply wasn't a priority.

The decision to table the talks doesn't come as a big surprise. Back when UConn emerged as part of the talks last month, an aura of skepticism hung over the Huskies potentially being added.

At the time, ESPN reported that there needed to be some votes added for the league to get the votes of 12 of the 16 Big 12 presidents it would have needed to add UConn."

That means at least 5 teams didn't want us, and that was that...
 
UConnDan97 said:
Additional info for the skeptics:

www.espn.com

Big 12's discussions to add UConn have stalled

The Big 12's conversations about potentially adding UConn as a member have stalled.
www.espn.com www.espn.com

"Per sources, the talks stalled and ended up being tabled because of the timing. With the initial season of the 16-team league underway and schools facing uncertainty in the House v. NCAA case as well as looming decisions on revenue share, adding membership simply wasn't a priority.

The decision to table the talks doesn't come as a big surprise. Back when UConn emerged as part of the talks last month, an aura of skepticism hung over the Huskies potentially being added.

At the time, ESPN reported that there needed to be some votes added for the league to get the votes of 12 of the 16 Big 12 presidents it would have needed to add UConn."

That means at least 5 teams didn't want us, and that was that...
Expand ...

Tabled is a key word here. Back to back (I do want to say solid) up seasons for football and yormark’s desires for Bball and New York may get us to the 12 required votes. Just keep doing what we are doing.
 
UConnDan97 said:
Additional info for the skeptics:

www.espn.com

Big 12's discussions to add UConn have stalled

The Big 12's conversations about potentially adding UConn as a member have stalled.
www.espn.com www.espn.com

"Per sources, the talks stalled and ended up being tabled because of the timing. With the initial season of the 16-team league underway and schools facing uncertainty in the House v. NCAA case as well as looming decisions on revenue share, adding membership simply wasn't a priority.

The decision to table the talks doesn't come as a big surprise. Back when UConn emerged as part of the talks last month, an aura of skepticism hung over the Huskies potentially being added.

At the time, ESPN reported that there needed to be some votes added for the league to get the votes of 12 of the 16 Big 12 presidents it would have needed to add UConn."

That means at least 5 teams didn't want us, and that was that...
Expand ...
If you follow the conclusion in the quite here, it “was tabled because of the timing”. No grudge, no geography, no culture. It’s in the quote. It further goes on to say they previously did not have the votes, not that they were taking a new vote and that they would have been short at that time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Online statistics

Members online
346
Guests online
5,112
Total visitors
5,458
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
165,066
Messages
4,419,919
Members
10,251
Latest member
Connres1980


.
..
Top Bottom