Seems like we just keep getting caught up in the perfect storm (geography, market size too small here, academics not good enough for there, new FB program, bla bla bla, etc.) Whatever, you name it, someone finds a reason why we're just not good enough for the big boy's table. Call it lack of hindsight by UConn & the state's brass or just lingering animosity by the ACC over the lawsuit. Who knows? There's just always a reason.
Do we really deserve this? Seriously? In a decade's time we've seen our conference turn from the Big East to Conference USA. Are we just paying the price for simply not having an established 1-A football program long enough?
Expansion is probably not over, and hope may arise for us again, but in reality - screw all this realignment. Screw the friggin' ACC for all this(yes, I said not long ago we should lighten up on that talk but I still will always hate 'em). Sick to death of getting the shaft in all the post-realignment carnage.
Let's just get to the Rent Saturday, support the home team, beat Cincy and get to a bowl game. The players deserve that much. About all we can control now anyway.
Be warned. What follows is a, probably irrational, contribution submitted by a very disappointed, dis-heartened individual. It probably rambles, as well.
It is not academics! UCONN is ranked 97 places higher than Louisville in "US News and World Report." It's not market size. Even without NYC, UCONN's market is larger, it's combined demographic far more affluent with more disposable income.
I believe the reasons go much deeper. The State and the University have been sending the wrong messages, to people that matter, since the first "raid." I said it then, and I'll say it again. The law suit was a dumb move. Yeah, other schools were party to the suit, but Blumenthal made sure his fingerprints, and therefore the State's, were all over the damn thing. All the suit accomplished was leaving of a bad taste in some very important mouths.
The law suit, together with the way the Notre Dame (and now Michigan) venue location arguments were handled, by the State, (I say "State" because I think the school was willing to be more flexible) caste the State, and therefore UCONN, in a perceptual negative. We're the inflexible guys that call Lawyers when things don't go our way. While some of our politicians and a good number of fans were busy banging on their collective chests, the world of college athletics was asking, "Who @#$ do these guys think they are?"
And that, the "who are we" argument is a big part of the problem. Too many define the incredible success of the basketball programs as leverage/clout/juice. While we have right and reason to be proud of basketball success, we have to understand that, in today's environment, success in anything but football is heavily discounted by the elite clubs we are trying to join. If it wasn't apparent before, how little leverage/clout/juice we have is becoming very clear. Not much, and any we do have can not be subjected to erosion caused by mouthy politicians.
Finally, to date, the school has done nothing to promote itself, more specifically, it's football success; marginal though it may be. That may be changing, but it might have taken too long to have the desired effect. You can say what you want about Rutgers, but,
they got the deal. A big reason for that was Schiano. He knew how to promote his University, his State and, most of all, his football program. The result? A school that is hemorrhaging cash and falling off the academic ledge, with a fair football program is, today, sitting in high cotton. Hell, UCONN didn't lose NYC. It, in the face of knowing that an improving NYC profile would greatly enhance the UCONN product, chose not to bother. It's almost as if Rutgers said "we are NYC's college athletic program" and we said, "oh, okay."
The concept of "blowing you own horn" is at odds with NE academia and the "Yankee work ethic." But, damn it, we better become comfortable with it very quickly. We also better become comfortable with the understanding that impressive leverage/clout/juice is gained through an outstanding FB program, or a program perceived as such. That will require both winning and personality with personality maybe the more important (see" "Schiano") of the two. Remember Kelly's first year at Cincy? How he raged against the local Cincy media for not covering the annual meeting in Newport? Or, the stories about him attending any and every event that gave him a chance to promote his program? It seems like every thing Kelly touched or did was positive for Cincy FB and it wasn't long before all his work culminated in much improved recruiting and team performance. While we have had moderate success, our coaches have been workman-like, one brick at a time, old-fashion, boring, ho-hum coaches. Hell, if UCONN's two 1A coaches had a personality contest, no one would win. Throw in Hathaway, and .......... Is RE a better FB coach than Schianno? Probably. Did RE accomplish more for his program? I'll answer by asking how are the two FB programs perceived?
Suggestions? Prez SH: Get the new advertising guy moving and don't hinder him with a bunch of restrictions. He's probably told you that extolling the FB program (and the school) while undoing present perception is going to be costly. Tell the AD to appoint a trusted assistant to all things not related to FB. Tell the AD that, until things improve, his total concentration is to be football and wealthy boosters. "Improve" means team performance, outward perception (how the world sees the program) and overall tone (the actual environment surrounding the program). Right now, at least as it looks to the outside, the only coach with a pulse, the only one who let's his players act like they are enjoying (without self-promotion) the moment is the DC. Articulate, happy players that perform on the field help sell a program.
UCONN and the State just got slapped with reality. Reality is football and more football. To my mind. it's fix it or it will die.
