well ...
The AAC is a good thing; the REVENUE derived - given the market position when originated - sucks. What were you expecting. We are not entitled to anything at UCONN. We should have been taken before Syracuse or Boston College by the ACC. Why? Because a Flagship State University can grow revenue sports far better than a Private with a one zip code/area code fanbase. UConn actually CAN extend into NYC and the rest of New England. And ... We should have been taken before Rutgers. Why? Because the ability to be excellent in Sports and BRAND should matter to these conferences. Things like Calhoun and Auriemma don't just happen. That is indicative of an entire AD, stakeholders and the capacity to drive to be good. Having the BEST Women's Program in any sport is going to matter - as much as some of you yahoos feign ignorance. Auriemma has another 7-10 years to go.
So both Swofford and Delany screwed up. Took dogs.
The AAC is the result; it is where we can grow these Programs until we get another chance.
How bad is it? For all the "directional" insults and the claims of "community college" athletics, the AAC is actually pretty good in Football, Basketball ... and for Baseball, WBB and other things. Not great. But it is as Aresco said, a Aspirational league. We should get more money - cause that contract exhibited our value.
ESPN? They overpaid. If whaler11 wants to whine, let him. The technology and the delivery of Sports content is changing and will change. My education tells me ... watch out: The P5 consists of too many outliers who will see an opportunity for supernormal revenue beyond the current structure. Texas is not the only one that believes they can grab more than their share. 64 other programs could come down to 10 or less in some other form.