UMASS in talks with potential new home?

[UMass]

True; but that is just the tip of the iceberg. Football has been bleeding money from UMass for decades and there is little support and almost not plan (see the half-arse attempt to join the MAC). UMass needs to decide if it wants to be playing BC, UConn, etc. every week or UNH, Maine, etc.

As for UMass overall, too many residents, especially around Boston where the money and power lie, view UMass as a back-up school for their aspirations for Harvard, BU, BC, Tufts, etc. In turn, their apathy towards UMass leads to no support on and no money from Beacon Hill. UConn has the same problem for decades; but, was able to turn the suddenly higher visibility with the basketball teams into UConn 2000 and successive projects. UMass needs its own ‘UConn 2000’ to catch-up; but, there is no plan, no will, and no budget to do so. It is feasible though. Just look what Meehan has been able to do with UMass Lowell over the last few years – new classroom building, more research, new dorms, and upgraded spots (II > IAA).

Could not agree more! In addition to your points above, the entire UMass system of one President with separate autonomous campuses each with their own Chancellor does not lend itself to Amherst ever being able to establish themselves as a flagship university.(Wow..that was quite the run-on sentence!) I've said before, UMass Lowell, with Meehan's political clout, may be the flagship before long.
The only way for UMass to pull off a "UConn 2000" is to establish a system much like UConn's. One university with satellite campuses. As long as the money from the state and endowment dollars are being split up like they are now, Amherst will never get the lion's share. Lowell and the Medical Center in Worcester will get preferential treatment. Heck, under our system we even recruit against each other now especially in hockey and lacrosse. That does not lend itself to ever accomplishing a "UConn 2000" of their own.

 

[HuskyHawk]

It isn't hypocritical of UConn to have a problem with UMass in the league. UMass just isn't on par with UConn or anyone else in the league. They have no stadium, win very little in any major sport and the administration and state don't back them adequately. UConn is on par with P5 schools. It's AD is bigger than half of them and more successful than most of them. If UConn were in a p5 conference the AD would grow exponentially.

BC doesn't want UConn further eclipsing them. UConn doesn't want to be in a conference with a school that isn't even committed to competing at this level. Big difference.

And that is your perception (and is shared by many), but it is also the perception that many others have of UConn. That we are not on par with BC, Pitt or Syracuse, let alone FSU, Clemson, VT, etc. So yes, we are hypocrites for looking down on anybody. It's the same kind of arrogant attitude we receive from others and we should know better. UMass certainly is attempting to compete. We may feel they won't succeed, but that is our outside perspective. The reality is that the basketball team is good and has history. The LAX team is superb. And football, while terrible in its short time at FBS, was better as a 1AA school than UConn ever was, including winning a national championship not that long ago. There is absolutely no reason why UMass can't bring themselves up to AAC levels in a few years any more than there are reasons why UConn can't bring football up to ACC and B1G levels in the same time. We make a lot of excuses, but UConn had a truly awful football team last year, and lost to FCS Towson.

 

[Husky25]

And that is your perception (and is shared by many), but it is also the perception that many others have of UConn. That we are not on par with BC, Pitt or Syracuse, let alone FSU, Clemson, VT, etc. So yes, we are hypocrites for looking down on anybody. It's the same kind of arrogant attitude we receive from others and we should know better. UMass certainly is attempting to compete. We may feel they won't succeed, but that is our outside perspective. The reality is that the basketball team is good and has history. The LAX team is superb. And football, while terrible in its short time at FBS, was better as a 1AA school than UConn ever was, including winning a national championship not that long ago. There is absolutely no reason why UMass can't bring themselves up to AAC levels in a few years any more than there are reasons why UConn can't bring football up to ACC and B1G levels in the same time. We make a lot of excuses, but UConn had a truly awful football team last year, and lost to FCS Towson.

Perception does not reflect reality vis a vie UConn as it does with UMass. Fans make a lot of excuses because last year (or the two preceeding last year) are not a representative sample of UConn football.

Prior to 2012, UConn football dominated Syracuse in their time in Div. 1A/FBS. UConn also was at least on par with Pitt & Louisville, and UConn played BC hard and close during their transition years from 63 to 85 scholarships, losing 2 games by a combined 18 points. UConn also won their conference twice and played in 5 bowl games, including a BCS Bowl over their first 7 seasons as a Div 1A/FBS program. UMass has won 2 games, period, in their first 24 at this level. The AAC is generally considered the best conference in the Group of 5 football conferences, whereas UMass couldn't compete in a low to middle quality G5 conference.

You have a misconception about UMass Basketball as well. UMass's winning "tradition" is spotty at best. They were pretty good, but overrated this past year, okay the year before, and Derek Kellogg has done an admirable job over the past 7 years to get them to this point, but you have to go back 15 years to get a decent run of NCAA Tourney appearances.

 

[Hoophound]

And that is your perception (and is shared by many), but it is also the perception that many others have of UConn. That we are not on par with BC, Pitt or Syracuse, let alone FSU, Clemson, VT, etc. So yes, we are hypocrites for looking down on anybody. It's the same kind of arrogant attitude we receive from others and we should know better. UMass certainly is attempting to compete. We may feel they won't succeed, but that is our outside perspective. The reality is that the basketball team is good and has history. The LAX team is superb. And football, while terrible in its short time at FBS, was better as a 1AA school than UConn ever was, including winning a national championship not that long ago. There is absolutely no reason why UMass can't bring themselves up to AAC levels in a few years any more than there are reasons why UConn can't bring football up to ACC and B1G levels in the same time. We make a lot of excuses, but UConn had a truly awful football team last year, and lost to FCS Towson.

Your theory is admirable but you are forgetting something very important. Massachusetts doesn't back UMASS adequately and it isn't going to. The state would rather give money to Lowell at this point. UMASS just doesn't have the facilities to pull it off. Basically, you are saying it would be easy for UMASS to find a few hundred million dollars in the seat cushions. It isn't happening.

UConn on the other hand is now a better school than most of the competition, has a stadium, has top notch practice facilities, has many championships and very, very high profile basketball programs. Most importantly, UConn has an unbelievable and undivided commitment from the state and it's residents to fund the holy hell out of it. They just aren't on the same plane anymore and pretending they are is silly. All of the other AAC members have an infrastructure that is far superior to UMASS.

 

[LIUCHusky]

And that is your perception (and is shared by many), but it is also the perception that many others have of UConn. That we are not on par with BC, Pitt or Syracuse, let alone FSU, Clemson, VT, etc. So yes, we are hypocrites for looking down on anybody. It's the same kind of arrogant attitude we receive from others and we should know better. UMass certainly is attempting to compete. We may feel they won't succeed, but that is our outside perspective. The reality is that the basketball team is good and has history. The LAX team is superb. And football, while terrible in its short time at FBS, was better as a 1AA school than UConn ever was, including winning a national championship not that long ago. There is absolutely no reason why UMass can't bring themselves up to AAC levels in a few years any more than there are reasons why UConn can't bring football up to ACC and B1G levels in the same time. We make a lot of excuses, but UConn had a truly awful football team last year, and lost to FCS Towson.

Husky Hawk, it is a stretch to say UMass was better than UConn ever was as a 1aa football program. The over all record between the 2 is 36 UMass, 34 UConn with 2 ties. UConn beat UMass twice in the season that UMass won the 1aa national championship.

 

[Waquoit]

UConn beat UMass twice in the season that UMass won the 1aa national championship.

I love that. Greatest season in UMass history was the one where they lost to UConn twice.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Husky Hawk, it is a stretch to say UMass was better than UConn ever was as a 1aa football program. The over all record between the 2 is 36 UMass, 34 UConn with 2 ties. UConn beat UMass twice in the season that UMass won the 1aa national championship.

Head to head is not relevant. There are teams where UConn's hoops head to head would not reflect the differences in the programs. UMass has been to three 1AA title games and played in two bowl games in the late 60's early 70's. I think they were the better 1AA program if not by a huge margin.

As for hoops, they are clearly a good program. The equivalent of Temple perhaps and better than 2/3 of the AAC. Not UConn level, no, not even close. In short, as much as I think UConn is out of its class in the AAC, I think UMass fits very well with the AAC schools.

 

[noeynox]

Head To Head, What Was Our Record Against Providence The Last 15 Meetings Or So In Men'S Bball? Anyone Want To Argue The Two Programs Are Even Close? We Are Going To Be Playing Basketball Against The Likes Of East Carolina, Tulane, And Tulsa. How Is Umass Worse Than any Of Those?

 

[Husky25]

As for hoops, they are clearly a good program. The equivalent of Temple perhaps and better than 2/3 of the AAC. Not UConn level, no, not even close. In short, as much as I think UConn is out of its class in the AAC, I think UMass fits very well with the AAC schools.

We have been in a "what have you done for me lately," college sports environment for at least the last 15 years, and Temple was down last year, but they have a better overall program now and throughout history than UMass. Temple had dominated UMass in the A-10 except for the Calipari years, when it escalated into a rivalry.

 

[ZooCougar]

Not in favor of UMass at this point. They are hardly even solvent.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Head To Head, What Was Our Record Against Providence The Last 15 Meetings Or So In Men'S Bball? Anyone Want To Argue The Two Programs Are Even Close? We Are Going To Be Playing Basketball Against The Likes Of East Carolina, Tulane, And Tulsa. How Is Inside Worse Than May Of Those?

That's exactly what I was thinking of actually...since I live 25 minutes from Providence and went to all those road games. Ugly.

By the way, historically, I was wrong and Temple is clearly ahead of UMass. But I don't think that's true for most of the AAC in basketball. Cincy, Memphis yes would be better. Houston on history (but they are worse at the moment). SMU about on par.

 

[noeynox]

Btw, I Hate Sufficiency, Aka Auto Correct.

 

[Drew]

http://www.masslive.com/umassfootball/index.ssf/2014/06/aac_commissioner_mike_aresco_s.html

 

[SubbaBub]

Build a stadium, commit to competing at the highest level, accomplish something, any thing that would indicate a chance of success then will talk.

Until then, they are a closer alternative to Buffalo.

This isn't close to the UConn/BC relationship. UConn was already in a BCS conference, won some games, built a 40 seat stadium that sold out frequently, had a successful AD and dominated it's media market. We also would have brought more value to the ACC than BC.

Would UMass bring more value to the AAC than UConn? Meet any of those other criteria? No, so leave the Yankee conference nostalgia where it belongs, in the 1900's.

Gillette vs. a road game in Buffalo, fine. It's nothing more than that. I'd rather play a road game against any other P5 team, instead.

 

[UConn9604]

Build a stadium, commit to competing at the highest level, accomplish something, any thing that would indicate a chance of success then will talk.

Until then, they are a closer alternative to Buffalo.

This isn't close to the UConn/BC relationship. UConn was already in a BCS conference, won some games, built a 40 seat stadium that sold out frequently, had a successful AD and dominated it's media market. We also would have brought more value to the ACC than BC.

Would UMass bring more value to the AAC than UConn? Meet any of those other criteria? No, so leave the Yankee conference nostalgia where it belongs, in the 1900's.

Gillette vs. a road game in Buffalo, fine. It's nothing more than that. I'd rather play a road game against any other P5 team, instead.

I'd go even farther - they're not even close to Buffalo at this point. The only value would be playing in Gillette and we would likely outdraw them there.

All of UConn's historical problems and deficiencies (being ignored by the state for decades, a state school in a wealthy state dominated by private schools, not near an urban center, etc.) are doubled or tripled at UMass. Unlike Connecticut since 1995, there hasn't been any real willingness by anyone in the state to do anything about it, either.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

My friends in and around boston, including several who went to Umass Amherst, believe it’s 50/50 if Umass will continue to sponsor football beyond the next 10 years. The program is simply loing too much money, the Commonweath will not commit to UMass, the arms race surrounding college atheltic facilities is getting our of control, and dropping football has not hurt Boston U nor Northeastern academically, which sets president for many on the acadmic side of UMass.

 

[Kolumbo]

That might happen to many more programs as the divide widens.
UCONN-UMASS at Gillette in 2016, supposedly.

 

[NickyNewark]

I have no issues with adding UMass to the AAC. It would basically be another Temple. Had UMass been given a platform like UConn got with the Big East at the very least they would be a better athletics program than Rutgers.

Maybe but I'd doubt it given VERY few talented HS FB players come out of Mass/Me/NH and do you really believe anyone in NY/NJ metro would care? Or would they draw 50G fans to a FB game? Mass may be the least interesting(I dont know anyone who even checks out their score in the boxscore) team in our area(Greater NY/NJ) and its an area than any major conference needs as a foundation block. With BC already there(who cares) and UConn wanting in how many New England teams given the weak HS FB support could D1 P5 FB support? Sorry uconNYC 1 of you're least informed posts and usually I like you're thoughts!! But I do agree they might be AAC quality and start upgading IF Uconn gets what they deserve(P5) but I'd be more interested in Temple and Philly than a FB weak Mass that already is covered by UConn and where BC is basically irrelevant!!