UConn to Big XII Imminent? | Page 3 | The Boneyard

UConn to Big XII Imminent?

Ha Who said:
Charlie Brown Football GIF
Expand ...
I thought you weren't going to post that?
 
JMick said:
Us preferring the ACC is weird unless we've had a lot of closed door talks with other ACC ADs and expect the conference to mostly stick together.
Expand ...
UConn would have taken smu deal into acc. To the big 12, probably needs more money. .
 
superjohn said:
We're not too far removed from the disastrous last couple Ollie years where we routinely lost to trash programs like Cincinnati and played in empty gyms.
Expand ...
i'd pay to see UConn play any of the teams in the BIG12 in either sport but couldnt say that about half of the AAC teams.
 
ZooCougar said:
That’s better than anyone reasonable would expect.

Tbf there isn’t much difference between making nothing and making a little. And right now we make a little.
Expand ...
Said differently, a half share of big 12 media distributions probably triples our big east media distributions.
 
.-.
Drew said:
This was the worst listen I’ve ever heard yep, +1

But screw it. Ain’t no point in being rational. Let’s ride.
Expand ...
Proof once again, that anyone can have a youtube podcast, SMH !....Uconn played in the Fiesta bowl in 2003 or 04 ??? just so many unfactual statements and clueless takes in that discussion. :confused: ... I could write a list... But I'm sure they did get the desired result. Which is plenty of clicks, views and comments during a slow college sports cycle. Despite whether there is a bit of truth their headline.
 
at this point am I the only one who would be fine taking a SMU-eque deal to get into the party? i say "-esque" beceause i figure we don't have the money to fund our existence out of pocket without SOME conference money. paying for travel and overhead, etc.

but isn't there a level of (temporary, defined end date) sacrifice uconn is willing to make that is palateable by P4 presidents and commish's? Just HOW toxic of an asset is UConn football? jeez you'd think we were BBB rated by moody's.

I have never seen a university so ill regarded, because of one single sport/team. it's almost a curse that our basketball team is so good and our football team is (recently) so bad. no one wants us :(
 
Last edited:
jostar1 said:
Not necessarily true. The UConn to the Big East rumor was posted on the Conference Realignment board before it happened.

the-boneyard.com

UConn to the NBE?

I know I'll get crucified for this thread, but just passing along something I heard today, because it came from a very credible source. Largest private donor at Providence, directly involved in their athletic department and knows Tranghese well (who he says UConn hired as a consultant at some...
the-boneyard.com the-boneyard.com
Expand ...
And was being talked about in PMs well before then.
 
.-.
Jetskies said:
at this point am I the only one who would be fine taking a SMU-eque deal to get into the party? i say "-esque" beceause i figure we don't have the money to fund our existence out of pocket without SOME conference money. paying for travel and overhead, etc.

but isn't there a level of sacrifice uconn is willing to make that is palateable by P4 presidents and commish's? Just HOW toxic of an asset is UConn football? jeez you'd think we were BBB rated by moody's.

I have never seen a university so ill regarded, because of one single sport/team. it's almost a curse that our basketball team is so good and our football team is (recently) so bad. no one wants us :(
Expand ...
Well it's the most important sport in the landscape and we've been arguably the worst program in the sport for over a decade. We even canceled an entire season of football.

We have the best basketball program in the country. Yormark knows how valuable that is but unfortunately a lot of these other people have their heads up their arses.
 
CL82 said:
Said differently, a half share of big 12 media distributions probably triples our big east media distributions.
Expand ...

You misunderstood. I was referring to taking no payout.

The problem with no payout is that we still have to pay the Big East exit fee.

SMU taking that deal along with Oregon and Wash taking partial shares has changed the game.
 
superjohn said:
Well it's the most important sport in the landscape and we've been arguably the worst program in the sport for over a decade. We even canceled an entire season of football.

We have the best basketball program in the country. Yormark knows how valuable that is but unfortunately a lot of these other people have their heads up their arses.
Expand ...

We have the two best basketball programs and Dan Hurley.

Women’s Sports has never been higher and probably hasn’t even crested yet.

Our Women’s Program is the greatest of all time and may be the greatest that will ever be.

If we can’t get a deal done now we may never.

I think the ship has sailed for my beloved football program.
 
Jetskies said:
at this point am I the only one who would be fine taking a SMU-eque deal to get into the party? i say "-esque" beceause i figure we don't have the money to fund our existence out of pocket without SOME conference money. paying for travel and overhead, etc.

but isn't there a level of (temporary, defined end date) sacrifice uconn is willing to make that is palateable by P4 presidents and commish's? Just HOW toxic of an asset is UConn football? jeez you'd think we were BBB rated by moody's.

I have never seen a university so ill regarded, because of one single sport/team. it's almost a curse that our basketball team is so good and our football team is (recently) so bad. no one wants us :(
Expand ...

There is the matter of owing $30M to the Big East as a buyout.

But it’s hard to disagree. The Big 12 is a more stable option, and the ACC has their heads up their arses.
 
ZooCougar said:
You misunderstood. I was referring to taking no payout.

The problem with no payout is that we still have to pay the Big East exit fee.

SMU taking that deal along with Oregon and Wash taking partial shares has changed the game.
Expand ...
It depends what the terms are, I suppose. The original SMU proposal assumed that SMU would be entitled to a full share of college football playoff money, which I believe is approximately 15 million per school. As it turned out, they weren't entitled to that, but if they had, it would've been more than what they were making in the AAC.

It's an interesting question. I suppose it would depend on how long we didn't take a share. Paying 30 million to make nothing isn't a great deal, obviously. I suppose it could make sense if the period for which we didn't get withdrawals was short enough. As with everything, the devil is in the details.
 
I don’t find any of the conferences attractive.

I’d just as soon get old big east football back together. That was more fun for all people involved.

i used to think acc was always desirable, but then they put in Louisville, smu, cal, Stanford.

That makes it so much more undesirable and dumb.

I have no idea where UConn athletics should park. Only thing I am certain of is the current makeup of these conferences is temporary and not sustainable.
 
.-.
CL82 said:
It depends what the terms are, I suppose. The original SMU proposal assumed that SMU would be entitled to a full share of college football playoff money, which I believe is approximately 15 million per school. As it turned out, they weren't entitled to that, but if they had, it would've been more than what they were making in the AAC.

It's an interesting question. I suppose it would depend on how long we didn't take a share. Paying 30 million to make nothing isn't a great deal, obviously. I suppose it could make sense if the period for which we didn't get withdrawals was short enough. As with everything, the devil is in the details.
Expand ...

Isn't SMU effectively receiving the equivalent of the ACC TV revenue over the next 7 years from big oil billionaire donors? For SMU's Athletic Department, this arrangement ensures their budget remains unaffected, as they will receive the equivalent amount that other ACC teams get from TV revenue each year, thanks to these donor pledges. The only difference is that after seven years, the donors will no longer need to provide that money. In contrast, UConn doesn't have donors at that level, so if we were in a similar situation, the cost would likely fall on state taxpayers, or it would have to be factored into tuition and student fees.
 
Forte said:
Isn't SMU effectively receiving the equivalent of the ACC TV revenue over the next 7 years from big oil billionaire donors? For SMU's Athletic Department, this arrangement ensures their budget remains unaffected, as they will receive the equivalent amount that other ACC teams get from TV revenue each year, thanks to these donor pledges. The only difference is that after seven years, the donors will no longer need to provide that money. In contrast, UConn doesn't have donors at that level, so if we were in a similar situation, the cost would likely fall on state taxpayers, or it would have to be factored into tuition and student fees.
Expand ...
It would almost certainly come from state funding to the university though not as a separate line item. Since I'm not a Connecticut resident, that doesn't matter to me all that much, but it would be nicer to have the athletic department closer to operating at break even.
 
Forte said:
Isn't SMU effectively receiving the equivalent of the ACC TV revenue over the next 7 years from big oil billionaire donors? For SMU's Athletic Department, this arrangement ensures their budget remains unaffected, as they will receive the equivalent amount that other ACC teams get from TV revenue each year, thanks to these donor pledges. The only difference is that after seven years, the donors will no longer need to provide that money. In contrast, UConn doesn't have donors at that level, so if we were in a similar situation, the cost would likely fall on state taxpayers, or it would have to be factored into tuition and student fees.
Expand ...
Think of how dumb a donation that is. Used for operating expenses. Not to buy players, infrastructure, or to do anything of merit.

It is like burning money.
 
.-.
ZooCougar said:
We have the two best basketball programs and Dan Hurley.

Women’s Sports has never been higher and probably hasn’t even crested yet.

Our Women’s Program is the greatest of all time and may be the greatest that will ever be.

If we can’t get a deal done now we may never.

I think the ship has sailed for my beloved football program.
Expand ...
Our women's basketball program starts declining on geno's retirement just like every other high profile program.

Larger women sports hardly matters a wooden nickel in athletics dollars. You already know basketball money is miniscule compared to football money.
 
JohnFSilver said:
Think of how dumb a donation that is. Used for operating expenses. Not to buy players, infrastructure, or to do anything of merit.

It is like burning money.
Expand ...
You have already been told SMU has silly money to burn and they will burn it
 
JohnFSilver said:
Think of how dumb a donation that is. Used for operating expenses. Not to buy players, infrastructure, or to do anything of merit.

It is like burning money.
Expand ...
No it's not. It's to get them out of total irrelevancy in sports. I don't think the ACC really has any chance of staying together but it gets them a seat at the table for now and it will keep them in the mix with a chance to pivot in the future. These people have fark u money and love their school/sports so it's money well spent for them.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,162
Messages
4,555,504
Members
10,441
Latest member
Virginiafan


Top Bottom