Why UConn is destined for the ACC

[nelsonmuntz]

Whatever anyone may think of Hathaway, and I am not a fan myself, he is not an idiot. If he or anyone got approached by the ACC, warning bells would have been shrieking and either a) they would have accepted the offer or b) run to the Big East and locked it up. It is ridiculous to think that UConn would have simply brushed off an ACC invite and then done nothing.

 

[Danzz]

http://m.tallahassee.com/latest/article?a=2011110220319&f=1476

Emails outline why FSU president plans to keep Florida State in the ACC
By Ira Schoffel
Democrat sports editor

"In a lengthy response, Barron wrote that three primary factors would drive any FSU decisions regarding conference realignment: The academic standing of conferences, the potential for team success and the potential financial gains. "Academically, the ACC is far stronger than the SEC," Barron wrote to Bailey, while listing the rankings from U.S. News & World Report. "From an academic viewpoint, we are in a premier league academically and the SEC doesn't stack up."

****
"The next two teams should not be weak northern teams like UConn or Rutgers," Voigt [an FSU graduate who emailed Barron] wrote. "That would dilute the football quality even further, and that will hurt FSU."

Barron did not specifically mention either school in his reply, but he explained that the options are limited. He noted that the members of the SEC and Big Ten --two of the closest conferences geographically --appear to be firmly entrenched.

"That means that in reality, the only path to a (16-team) super conference, were that to happen, is the Big East and the Big 12," Barron wrote. "And, the only way to have it be meaningful is if it opens up TV markets that net the conference money. Combined, these two factors mean that there are really very few universities out there that can even be considered."

" The academic standing of conferences"
What a joke. FSU brings down any conference they join academicly. Great school if you want a career in the circus.

 

[TRest]

Whatever anyone may think of Hathaway, and I am not a fan myself, he is not an idiot. If he or anyone got approached by the ACC, warning bells would have been shrieking and either a) they would have accepted the offer or b) run to the Big East and locked it up. It is ridiculous to think that UConn would have simply brushed off an ACC invite and then done nothing.

How would one lock up the BE? Gazillion dollar exit fees?

 

[UCHuskies08]

Seems like the template for that is TV rights lockup

 

[fortebleedsblue]

There is still a chance we end up in the Car Care bowl playing an ACC team. I prefer NYC or obviously (BCS) but if UConn turns things around I wouldn't mind taking on an ACC team in a bowl this year.

A sad reality is that after Pitt and Cuse join the ACC they will have more Big East football tradition than ...... well the Big East. (Pitt, Cuse, VT, Miami, BC) Lots of conference history there.

 

[upstater]

Before this gets too out of hand, if such a conversation (ACC officials formally or informally discussing with UConn the possibility of an invitation only to have us sh n them) occurred, it would have been late spring of 2011 at the earliest (when the ACC began looking at a means to get their undermarket TV deal reworked). Hogan was gone for a year by then and while she hadn't officially begun her new position, Herbst had made it to Pasqualoni's introduction, the national title celebration at Gampel and the White House visit by then. With her contacts within the ACC, there is no way she would not have been in the loop if this occurred.

The Nova guy peddling this story claims it was well before that, last Fall. He has no real credibility since he mentions it to torture Rutgers fans, but he has been saying this since last Spring. He has been saying that UConn and Syracuse have been approached to move as early as last spring.

 

[upstater]

" The academic standing of conferences"
What a joke. FSU brings down any conference they join academicly. Great school if you want a career in the circus.

All the more reason to be concerned about academics.

Frankly, I tend to denigrate this idea for most schools. For Duke, for instance, it doesn't make any difference whatsoever what conference it's in. Vanderbilt isn't hurt by its associations. Florida St. however is about to go through a rough patch academically. They are probably very concerned about perceptions of them academically at this point.

 

[ctchamps]

How would one lock up the BE? Gazillion dollar exit fees?

In five years a Gazillion dollars will be worth as much as a million.

 

[ruskin]

Can we extinguish this growing urban myth that Hathaway "turned down" the ACC invite? It's pretty concrete UConn was in until DeFilippo intervened. "We wanted to be the New England school" is going to be on his tombstone, for goodness sakes.

 

[ctchamps]

All the more reason to be concerned about academics.

Frankly, I tend to denigrate this idea for most schools. For Duke, for instance, it doesn't make any difference whatsoever what conference it's in. Vanderbilt isn't hurt by its associations. Florida St. however is about to go through a rough patch academically. They are probably very concerned about perceptions of them academically at this point.

I think an argument can be made that standards within the school as well as marketing of the school improve the schools attractiveness to students and therefore can influence the improvement of academic standing. UConn has done and is doing a lot of things within the school structure to make it more attractive both in numbers of students wanting to apply and brighter students wanting to apply.

And UConns sports success has given a bump in the universities attractiveness which, it can be argued, offered the university a greater opportunity than otherwise might have occurred, to take internal steps. So a pitch can be made by a university about its association with a particular conference as part of its marketing to get students. And certainly there are students who would factor conference affiliation in their decision, as well as students who would not consider conference affiliation as an important factor in their decision. The same goes with alumni and getting donations. Perception is important even if the academics of Duke has zero correlation with the academics of FSU.

In the end it is the substantive actions taken by a university that really counts. Marketing can offer an initial attraction to the product by customers, but unless the product delivers, a negative reputation will develop and undo the effectiveness of the marketing.

 

[jpm25]

How would one lock up the BE? Gazillion dollar exit fees?

assignment of media rights

 

[FfldCntyFan]

assignment of media rights

True but at this point this would be like locking all remaining passengers below deck after the Titanic hit the iceberg (and some already departed on lifeboats).

 

[noeynox]

True but at this point this would be like locking all remaining passengers below deck after the Titanic hit the iceberg (and some already departed on lifeboats).

Yep, that ship sailed. This should have been done while Pitt/SU/TCU were still on board. Problem with Big East football side is that it has always been reactionary rather than proactive. Why weren't we having discussions about adding the Boise's, SMU, Houston's before the most recent defections? Is it because it would dilute the basketball product? Sad, because the Big East has provided great basketball moments and good football ones. The Big East commissioner's office and the Big East presidents failed in pushing the envelope and moving this conference from a good football conference and trying to make it great. Locking up the likes of Boise and TCU in some form of western division under the Big East banner with a forward thinking media rights assignment would have been a stroke of genius.

 

[ctchamps]

Yep, that ship sailed. This should have been done while Pitt/SU/TCU were still on board. Problem with Big East football side is that it has always been reactionary rather than proactive. Why weren't we having discussions about adding the Boise's, SMU, Houston's before the most recent defections? Is it because it would dilute the basketball product? Sad, because the Big East has provided great basketball moments and good football ones. The Big East commissioner's office and the Big East presidents failed in pushing the envelope and moving this conference from a good football conference and trying to make it great. Locking up the likes of Boise and TCU in some form of western division under the Big East banner with a forward thinking media rights assignment would have been a stroke of genius.

Syracuse and WV did not have an allegiance to the BE. And that lack of commitment impacted the remaining six football schools in how they had to approach the conference. It prevented the conference from making more stringent exit requirements for instance.

And the conference was in discussion to improve the football product. TCU was on board and would have been a BE member but that was destroyed by A&M. The only questionable decision was to wait on Nova. But the distaste some of the BE football schools might have had for this decision was probably as much as a way of providing an excuse for their own desires to leave the BE, as it was a questionable business decision.

The BE was in discussions with the service academies. And the logical step was that BS was not coming east unless it had a regional partner. The only question was whether they should have approached the football expansion piecemeal or invite 4-8 teams quickly. And the only reason we have an answer to that is because outside circumstances interceded in the process. Piecemeal would have been the better approach because the conference could have been more selective. But once events played out the way they did the conference is left with no choice but to consider multiple entries.

 

[jpm25]

True but at this point this would be like locking all remaining passengers below deck after the Titanic hit the iceberg (and some already departed on lifeboats).

I agree. I was responding to a question of how one would lock up the BE - this is not at all likely or even possible I would imagine.

 

[upstater]

I think an argument can be made that standards within the school as well as marketing of the school improve the schools attractiveness to students and therefore can influence the improvement of academic standing. UConn has done and is doing a lot of things within the school structure to make it more attractive both in numbers of students wanting to apply and brighter students wanting to apply.

And UConns sports success has given a bump in the universities attractiveness which, it can be argued, offered the university a greater opportunity than otherwise might have occurred, to take internal steps. So a pitch can be made by a university about its association with a particular conference as part of its marketing to get students. And certainly there are students who would factor conference affiliation in their decision, as well as students who would not consider conference affiliation as an important factor in their decision. The same goes with alumni and getting donations. Perception is important even if the academics of Duke has zero correlation with the academics of FSU.

In the end it is the substantive actions taken by a university that really counts. Marketing can offer an initial attraction to the product by customers, but unless the product delivers, a negative reputation will develop and undo the effectiveness of the marketing.

For a few schools, sports success might count. You can't make that case for the vast majority since so many of the top schools are not into bigtime sports. What about Boston U, NYU, UCal-San Diego, schools like that? SUNYs? All these schools have risen up the ranks, all of them have huge increases in applicants and quality of students. Some bigtime sports schools have dropped like rocks in the rankings. So, while I buy the argument for a few schools, I don't think it makes a bit of difference for the majority.

 

[huskyrob1]

It is ridiculous to think that UConn would have simply brushed off an ACC invite and then done nothing.

Not so ridiculous if you think Hathaway was palsey walsey with Gavitt, Mike Tranghese, Marinatto, and the rest of those Providence... catholic school...Big East Tournament at MSG parasites. Look at what transpired around the same time, Edsall bolted to Maryland, Hathaway was fired, and the last week Marinatto gave Jeffy boy a job. The people that run the Big East don't give a about D1 football, they say they do but they don't, the Big East football schools have only recently begun to realize that, hence the exodus. They (the basketball onlys) showed their true colors way back in 1985 when they denied Penn State membership because they sucked in basketball and devoted too much of their athletic budget to football. The commisioners office of the Big East (Providence College) only cares about one thing...the health of basketball and the BE Tourney at MSG. That unwritten bylaw has not changed in 30 years. The only thing that would change that is if the loss of football schools would begin to impinge on the sport of basketball in the conf, and that may have already begun to occurr.

 

[RS9999X]

This just goes to show that the university presidents and ADs can see beyond the simple minded idiots who populate message boards.

What it means is they can write clearly and concisely and spin things in a politically correct manner.

He made some great points in the last few months. He believes Florida State can have greater success and more national visibility in the ACC when all sports are considered and the coaches don't favor a move .

Here's the crux of the issue: As he states: Money is the only reason for a move. A move to the SEC would mean more annual revenue. Any short-term financial gains may be lost in research dollars when partnering with the SEC and B12 Schools. The B12 isn't stable and there's significant risk of burning bridges by making the move. The SEC can't offer FSU its full worth due to the presence of Florida.

The only compelling case from FSU is the Pitt and SU case. We've sucked out the place in recent years because of our conference affiliation. Let's forget the Robinson fiasco and the Wannstedt replacment mess and move forward like the ADs are competent. Player misbehavior can be chalked up to conference affiliation. Bobby Bowden will rise again in the SEC or B12!

Look at Duke's well-behaved players like Greg Paulus, a Syracuse resident. The fact he played his HS ball in Manley Field House is an example of how little interest he had in a BE school. If we were in the ACC Paulus would have commited to the Orange at birth.

 

[RuffRuff]

What I feel like so much of this analysis on Uconn fails to miss is "potential". Listen, is Uconn an established football brand? No. It has a long way to go. That doesn't come in a decade plus. But this one of the brand name state universities in the Northeast - the Northeast is, if nothing else, is the most dense/$$ pockets in the US. It has a rabid fan base(as seen by basketball) and stadium expansion capabilities. It has a strong brand it can leverage(from basketball) and it can lean on the fact that it took a D1AA program to a BCS bowl game in a very short time frame - the potential is there. The academic accumen is there. So if put in the right conference with the right drawing cards and the right coach, why couldn't because a successful revenue generating football program? I just think the platform is there, the momentum from the hoops program is there and the brand potential is there to hold Northeast recruits.

So although it's always the ideal to go after established, I think if you want to buy low with high upside, the ACC is not going to find a more appropriate program.

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

assignment of media rights

good luck getting any current big east football member to agree to that. i dont even think usf would.

 

[uconnfan68]

What I feel like so much of this analysis on Uconn fails to miss is "potential". Listen, is Uconn an established football brand? No. It has a long way to go. That doesn't come in a decade plus. But this one of the brand name state universities in the Northeast - the Northeast is, if nothing else, is the most dense/$$ pockets in the US. It has a rabid fan base(as seen by basketball) and stadium expansion capabilities. It has a strong brand it can leverage(from basketball) and it can lean on the fact that it took a D1AA program to a BCS bowl game in a very short time frame - the potential is there. The academic accumen is there. So if put in the right conference with the right drawing cards and the right coach, why couldn't because a successful revenue generating football program? I just think the platform is there, the momentum from the hoops program is there and the brand potential is there to hold Northeast recruits.

So although it's always the ideal to go after established, I think if you want to buy low with high upside, the ACC is not going to find a more appropriate program.

Well said. My heart is almost broken now. To be tossed to the curb by BCS schools over lack of football pedigree will be the death knell of UConn athletics. I think we're a good get for almost anyone. Maybe not the SEC because we have integrity, but anyone else.

 

[NHUConnfan]

As mentioned by Danzz, but no one seemed to pick up on it...

FSU using academics as its reason is quite honestly laughable. If FSU wants to talk about fitting in academically, by all means they fit better with the SEC.

ACC:
#10 Duke
#25 Virginia
#25 Wake Forest
#29 UNC-Chapel Hill
#31 Boston College
#36 Georgia Tech
#38 Miami
#55 Maryland
(#58 Pitt)
(#62 Syracuse)
#68 Clemson
#71 Virginia Tech
#101 Florida State
#101 NC State

SEC:
#17 Vanderbilt
#58 Texas Tech
#58 Florida
#62 Georgia
#75 Alabama
#82 Auburn
(#90 Missouri)
#101 Tennessee
#111 South Carolina
#124 Kentucky
#128 LSU
#132 Arkansas
#143 Mississippi
#157 Mississippi State

Sooo...to me, this looks like FSU belongs in the SEC...

 

[Mr.Phat]

What scares me, and a lot of people say it's true, is that Swofford approached Jeff Hathaway many months ago about coming to the ACC and Hathaway gave him the brushoff and said "no thanks".

There is NO WAY that this would not be a PRESIDENTIAL level decision. If Hathaway said no then Hogan did too. Blame him. But then he couldn't wait to get out of here for the wheat fields of the midwest. His family hated it here.

 

[Heston]

If the ACC negotiates its new TV deal and it ends up being very big, the chances of Uconn getting an invite to the ACC drop to very small for the time being. Even if certain coaches want 16 teams or a bunch of ADs think it makes sense for scheduling, there will be no further expansion unless it adds money. All these other factors don't matter unless that one is true. No athletic department is going to take less money to go to 16. The bottom line for the ACC is what ESPN will be willing to pay to go from 14 to 16. Who is ESPN going to pay more for? Why would they pay more for Uconn? ESPN will still bid on the Big East basketball contract. They will still end up with what they want. Coach K can talk about why he wants 16 all day long, unless ND goes to the ACC, the ACC will not be expanding anytime soon.

 

[businesslawyer]

If the ACC negotiates its new TV deal and it ends up being very big, the chances of Uconn getting an invite to the ACC drop to very small for the time being. Even if certain coaches want 16 teams or a bunch of ADs think it makes sense for scheduling, there will be no further expansion unless it adds money. All these other factors don't matter unless that one is true. No athletic department is going to take less money to go to 16. The bottom line for the ACC is what ESPN will be willing to pay to go from 14 to 16. Who is ESPN going to pay more for? Why would they pay more for Uconn? ESPN will still bid on the Big East basketball contract. They will still end up with what they want. Coach K can talk about why he wants 16 all day long, unless ND goes to the ACC, the ACC will not be expanding anytime soon.

Nothing you said doesn't make sense. Except that I could have said the same about the Pac Ten taking Utah and Colorado and the SEC taking Mizzou and the ACC taking Pitt and Syracuse. So it's more complicated than that.

 

[huskyjawz]

Nothing you said doesn't make sense. Except that I could have said the same about the Pac Ten taking Utah and Colorado and the SEC taking Mizzou and the ACC taking Pitt and Syracuse. So it's more complicated than that.

not true regarding the acc; taking pitt and cuse allowed them to renegotiate their tv contract, thereby bringing in more money.

 

[Heston]

Nothing you said doesn't make sense. Except that I could have said the same about the Pac Ten taking Utah and Colorado and the SEC taking Mizzou and the ACC taking Pitt and Syracuse. So it's more complicated than that.

Well, it might not make sense to you, but it makes it no more less true. There is no expansion at all unless there is more money. Period. End of story.

ACC:

When the ACC went from 12 to 14 by adding Pitt and Cuse they added a northeast footprint along with BC. That money is done. It is going to be baked in with this new TV deal. The ACC is going to get a premium for it.

To go from 14 to 16 without ND you need to bring enough to the table to at least keep the money the same per team. ESPN is not going to pay for a Northeast presence. They already got that. Now, which programs can bring in more incremental money to the ACC if they go from 14 to 16? Even Uconn is a break even as the 15th (which MIGHT be true), you still need the 16th to be at least that. ESPN is not going to pay a bunch of more money for Rutgers in the ACC when Cuse is already there. If you don't think that makes sense, that it fine. But that is the reality.

PAC-12:

No, you could not have said the same thing about the Pac-12. The Pac-12 added CU and Utah because they would bring more money. Hence why they were offered and why the Pac-12 did get more money. Not only more money, massively more money. A monster TV deal that is causing every other conference to try to renegotiate. There would NEVER have been expansion at that point without it.

Fox and ESPN and every consultant told the Pac-12, they needed non Pacific time slots to get more TV money because of the nature of the west coast and how late the games start. I actually saw Larry Scott speak about it in person at a luncheon.

The PAC-12 even further proves my point. In spite of the fact OU and OSU wanted to go a few months ago, with or without Texas, they did not have the votes to get in the Pac 12. The easy TV money by moving into the mountain time slot was taken. The Pac-12 schools had signed a fat deal and they said, hey we begged you a year ago, but now we doing even need you. Scott took the message back the only way they were in is if Texas came in to and gave up the LHN.

I won't address the SEC because it is obvious to everyone that they took A&M for more money. Missouri is coming in as the 14th because they will not dilute that incremental value in terms of money and get the SEC back to even numbers.

It is not that complicated. As for ESPN still bidding on the Big East basketball contract, of course they will. If they get it, they have the best of what Uconn offers without having to pay a dime for the stuff they don't want.

 

[businesslawyer]

Well, it might not make sense to you, but it makes it no more less true. There is no expansion at all unless there is more money. Period. End of story.

ACC:

When the ACC went from 12 to 14 by adding Pitt and Cuse they added a northeast footprint along with BC. That money is done. It is going to be baked in with this new TV deal. The ACC is going to get a premium for it.

To go from 14 to 16 without ND you need to bring enough to the table to at least keep the money the same per team. ESPN is not going to pay for a Northeast presence. They already got that. Now, which programs can bring in more incremental money to the ACC if they go from 14 to 16? Even Uconn is a break even as the 15th (which MIGHT be true), you still need the 16th to be at least that. ESPN is not going to pay a bunch of more money for Rutgers in the ACC when Cuse is already there. If you don't think that makes sense, that it fine. But that is the reality.

PAC-12:

No, you could not have said the same thing about the Pac-12. The Pac-12 added CU and Utah because they would bring more money. Hence why they were offered and why the Pac-12 did get more money. Not only more money, massively more money. A monster TV deal that is causing every other conference to try to renegotiate. There would NEVER have been expansion at that point without it.

Fox and ESPN and every consultant told the Pac-12, they needed non Pacific time slots to get more TV money because of the nature of the west coast and how late the games start. I actually saw Larry Scott speak about it in person at a luncheon.

The PAC-12 even further proves my point. In spite of the fact OU and OSU wanted to go a few months ago, with or without Texas, they did not have the votes to get in the Pac 12. The easy TV money by moving into the mountain time slot was taken. The Pac-12 schools had signed a fat deal and they said, hey we begged you a year ago, but now we doing even need you. Scott took the message back the only way they were in is if Texas came in to and gave up the LHN.

I won't address the SEC because it is obvious to everyone that they took A&M for more money. Missouri is coming in as the 14th because they will not dilute that incremental value in terms of money and get the SEC back to even numbers.

It is not that complicated. As for ESPN still bidding on the Big East basketball contract, of course they will. If they get it, they have the best of what Uconn offers without having to pay a dime for the stuff they don't want.

If you really believe that the Pac Ten was worth "massively more" not because of market timing and the changes in media competition, but the addition of Utah and Colorado, there is no point conversing further.

 

[Heston]

If you really believe that the Pac Ten was worth "massively more" not because of market timing and the changes in media competition, but the addition of Utah and Colorado, there is no point conversing further.

The timing of their contract was significant. When the ACC and SEC redo their deals we will have a better comparison for how much of a factor. But the other reason was the addition of the mountain time slot. Which would not matter to another conference since they don't have that left coast time slot issue. But that was just what Larry Scott said. But, what does he know, right?

 

[businesslawyer]

So your theory is that Utah and Colorado, while not worth anywhere near $20M annually in TV rights to the MWC and Big XII, collectively, were worth that much to the Pac Ten, but that you know with certainty that UConn, not worth $16M a year (or whatever it is) to the Big East, can't be worth that amount to the ACC? O.K. You're just smarter than I am I guess.

What I see is a market where conferences are paying far more a year for properties that weren't worth that in their prior homes. And my best guess is that there is, right now, value in mass for television packaging. You can always argue ancillary factors like "mountain time zone." So what. Who lives there? And how does a one hour difference, as opposed to a two or three hour difference, help you stagger product? I can come up with tons of ancillary factors for UConn. Killing off Big East basketball as we know it. Making the ACC a superpower hoops league by itself with no cmpetition ever. Having a dominant football presence in NYC, especially if you add Rutgers and Syracuse and UConn together. Note that, today, the ACC can't get it's football package on the air in NYC. UConn itself has SNY taking any game it can get its hands on.

That being the case, I am going to actually have to see UConn stuck in the remanants of the Big East on the day Pitt and Syracuse leave to be convinced that you are right.