(05-27-2013 11:19 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  At least USF has a couple of big games on their schedule to help out, and a built in rival in UCF...

UConn's doing okay in this regard to with Michigan and Maryland this year and future series with BYU, Boise, and Tennessee I believe. Their built in AAC rival will be Temple I imagine.

Cheers,
Neil

(05-27-2013 10:43 AM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 09:43 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 09:25 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 08:13 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  I agree that UConn does not have a future in the ACC, but I don't think that it's for reasons of football attendance. They are only 10-15 years into building their program. Their stadium was built with an expansion option. I see no reason why their attendance can't develop the same way that Rutgers' and Louisville's did as they invested and built their programs. Everything you're saying about UConn could be said about those 2 programs as little as a decade ago.

There are two aspects, interrelated of course, of building a football program: facilities and fan support. UConn is fortunate in that their state legislature has been willing to pour money into UConn athletic facilities at a time when legislatures in most states are cutting support for higher education. So that aspect seems to be pretty well covered and it gives UConn a leg up on just about all other AAC schools jockeying for P5 promotion.

Thus, the real issue for UConn in becoming "P5 ready" is fan support. And in that regard, the $64 question is "can UConn build real fan support while playing an AAC schedule"?

The doubts is out about that one ...

I don't understand the doubts about UConn building fan support. They only started this project 15 years ago and have less than 10 years at the BCS level. They've averaged 38,000 fans since they joined the Big East. There are plenty of BCS schools with much longer traditions who are averaging less than that or not much more.

Ten years ago, Rutgers was averaging 27,000 fans. This year they averaged 49,000. I don't see any reason why UConn can't do the same thing if they develop a successful program. If the program is a loser, the fans will stay away. Build it and they will come.

Melky, no one is saying that Uconn cannot build fan support. My limited critique is to you and the other Uconn fans who denigrate other programs (see the "Division 2" comment above) that have attendance as good or BETTER than Uconn's and who just accept as some sort of given that Uconn will automatically rise above everyone else in the northeast.

In your earlier post, you claimed that BC's attendance fell because of its move to the ACC. That is just not true. BC's attendance dipped in 2005 and 2006 as a result of the DBS pricing which went into effect with the move to the ACC, which angered a lot lot of BC season ticket holders. I have friends which gave up their season tickets in protest. By 2007 and 2008, however, BC's attendance climbed back up to levels it had been for most of its time in the BE. Then came the Spaz era and the rest, as they say, is history.

It is somewhat humorous to see Uconn fans claim that BC's move to the ACC was a "big mistake" when at the same time their Administration and their fans are openly begging for a chance to make the same "big mistake."

I will reiterate what I said in my earlier post. BC has advantages in New England that Uconn will find hard to match...and not just the "Power 5" membership. BC is a private school, with a top level academic reputation, on campus facilities, a beautiful campus, and sits on the edge of Boston (the stadium actually sits in Boston). As a Jesuit institution, it has a pipeline to Jesuit HS's all over the country. For a student athlete wanting that type of experience, BC is one of a limited set of choices (after all, they cannot ALL go to Notre Dame...LOL).

With a new AD and coaching staff in place, we are beginning to see the resurgence. I noticed you did not comment on the whopping recruiting disparity between BC and Uconn so far this year. IMO, this is because BC FINALLY has a coaching staff that can actually sell BC's unique strengths. Time will tell.....but as a Uconn fan, this has to be worrying.

All good points. You don't have to sell me on BC. I was sold long ago and paid 4 years of tuition for one of my daughters to attend BC. I don't recall denigrating BC and wouldn't because I don't feel that way.

I don't know if the move to the ACC "caused" BC's decline in attendance, but the 2 coincided. To blame everything on Spaz ignores the fact that the attendance declined during 2 winning seasons in 2009-10 - 2 winning seasons which followed back-t0-back trips to the ACC championship game. Even if the past 2 seasons can be attributed to poor performance on the field, how do you explain those 2 seasons?

As for your humorous take on UConn fans complaining, I certainly didn't want to have anything to do with the ACC and I don't know any UConn fans who did. Frankly 10 years ago, none of us saw this kind of radical realignment occurring the way it has.

I was wrong, but I thought it was a mistake for BC to make the move back then. In retrospect, it has worked out to their advantage, but that doesn't mean that they haven't sacrificed a lot. Consider the following:

1. Lost an annual football game with Miami when they thought the ACC would build the rivalry.

2. Lost an annual football game in the NJ area (Rutgers/Temple) where a lot of their alums live.

3. Lost annual basketball trips to NY/NJ and the annual MSG tournament which provided access for a lot of their alums in NYC/LI as well as NJ.

4. Also lost trips to Syracuse & Pitt - less important in terms of alumni access but still access for some Northeastern alums.

5. Lost valuable basketball rivalries with a bunch of fellow Catholic school rivals up & down the East Coast including academic peers like Georgetown & Villanova as well as Notre Dame.

6. Football and basketball attendance have both declined for whatever reasons.

I know a lot of BC alums who miss those rivalries and who long for the old days. But times change. BC-Holy Cross was once THE big time BC rivalry and that's gone too. But the Holy cross rivalry was replaceable - especially as BC academics gained national stature.

However, you can't fix geography. BC is now cut off from its alumni base in the tri-state area. Maybe BC doesn't care, but that seems like a big deal to me and to a lot of the BC alums I know. I think that BC would have been better of pushing for and successfully achieving an all sports eastern league ten years ago than heading south where they're now in a division without Miami, without Georgia Tech, and without the academic blue bloods that they wanted to be associated with.

Of course UConn is worried. They should be. But it's not about a single recruiting class (recruiting success fluctuates from year to year). It's about the loss of BCS status and lack of major revenue streams. As for recruiting, they're not playing the same level of competition as BC is. You shouldn't be comparing your recruiting to us but to the rest of the ACC. UConn can develop into a Utah, Louisville, Boise State, or TCU if they can beat the teams on their schedule, which does not include BC. Unfortunately IMO.

I completely agree with you about BC's unique position. Too many fans are unaware of the extent to which a Catholic school network exists across much of the country and don't understand why this network is why the new Catholic Big East will flourish. BC and ND as the only football schools among this group do have a unique recruiting advantage.

But UConn also has a unique position. It is now recognized as without academic peer among the New England state universities. It is a top 20 public research university, so it too can recruit students to its beautiful rural campus with a unique portfolio. BC and UConn aren't really in competition with each other although BC for some reason has always been concerned about this. Both are capable of being just fine.

We have two different takes on this. I respect your opinion, I just don't think that the move to the ACC has been all that good for BC. Financially, it's been great and has proven to be the right move, but a lot has been lost in the process.

(05-27-2013 11:19 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  At least USF has a couple of big games on their schedule to help out, and a built in rival in UCF...

UCF guarantees pretty good attendance at RJS, but not because USF fans are excited by the game. We really aren't. We'd much rather think of FSU or Miami as rivals than UCF. It's just that UCF fans in the Tampa area will also come out to the game.

Of course you would rather think of FSU and Miami as rivals but you really aren't.

(05-27-2013 11:17 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 09:43 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 09:25 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 08:13 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  I agree that UConn does not have a future in the ACC, but I don't think that it's for reasons of football attendance. They are only 10-15 years into building their program. Their stadium was built with an expansion option. I see no reason why their attendance can't develop the same way that Rutgers' and Louisville's did as they invested and built their programs. Everything you're saying about UConn could be said about those 2 programs as little as a decade ago.

There are two aspects, interrelated of course, of building a football program: facilities and fan support. UConn is fortunate in that their state legislature has been willing to pour money into UConn athletic facilities at a time when legislatures in most states are cutting support for higher education. So that aspect seems to be pretty well covered and it gives UConn a leg up on just about all other AAC schools jockeying for P5 promotion.

Thus, the real issue for UConn in becoming "P5 ready" is fan support. And in that regard, the $64 question is "can UConn build real fan support while playing an AAC schedule"?

The doubts is out about that one ...

I don't understand the doubts about UConn building fan support. They only started this project 15 years ago and have less than 10 years at the BCS level. They've averaged 38,000 fans since they joined the Big East.

... but as i noted, they are not in the Big East anymore. They will not be hosting bigger names like Pitt, West Virginia, and Syracuse anymore. They will be hosting Temple, Memphis, Houston, and Tulsa, teams that their fan base probably has far less intrinsic interest in.

This is not a problem unique to UConn. USF has to deal with it as well. But I believe it is a very formidable issue, particularly for those of us that were in the Big East and whose fans got used to seeing the bigger-name opponents on the schedule. It is going to be very hard to avoid a decline in football attendance, much less build that attendance up to P5 levels.

I do not envy ticket marketers at places like USF, Cincy, and UConn, whose job it is to get season ticket holders to renew tickets for what is now an AAC schedule. That's a very tough sell, and yet we can't just avoid losing ticket sales, we need to significantly increase them so as to impress potential P5 partners.

I don't think that it's the big names that will draw fans to UConn home games. The program isn't at that level.

Yes, UConn has sold out against the name schools you mentioned, but they've also sold out in recent years in home games against Cincinnati, Virginia, and Vanderbilt.

What tells me more is that UConn had near sell outs within the past few years in back-to-back seasons against Rhode Island, an old time yankee Conference rival. What Uconn needs more than anything is rivalries, which is why the AAC decision to take Tulsa over UMass was so colossally bad for both UConn and the league.

The best thing that could happen for UConn would be to add UMass and for the State University of NY campuses at Stony Brook and Albany decide to grow their programs.

(05-27-2013 11:28 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 10:43 AM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 09:43 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 09:25 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 08:13 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  I agree that UConn does not have a future in the ACC, but I don't think that it's for reasons of football attendance. They are only 10-15 years into building their program. Their stadium was built with an expansion option. I see no reason why their attendance can't develop the same way that Rutgers' and Louisville's did as they invested and built their programs. Everything you're saying about UConn could be said about those 2 programs as little as a decade ago.

There are two aspects, interrelated of course, of building a football program: facilities and fan support. UConn is fortunate in that their state legislature has been willing to pour money into UConn athletic facilities at a time when legislatures in most states are cutting support for higher education. So that aspect seems to be pretty well covered and it gives UConn a leg up on just about all other AAC schools jockeying for P5 promotion.

Thus, the real issue for UConn in becoming "P5 ready" is fan support. And in that regard, the $64 question is "can UConn build real fan support while playing an AAC schedule"?

The doubts is out about that one ...

I don't understand the doubts about UConn building fan support. They only started this project 15 years ago and have less than 10 years at the BCS level. They've averaged 38,000 fans since they joined the Big East. There are plenty of BCS schools with much longer traditions who are averaging less than that or not much more.

Ten years ago, Rutgers was averaging 27,000 fans. This year they averaged 49,000. I don't see any reason why UConn can't do the same thing if they develop a successful program. If the program is a loser, the fans will stay away. Build it and they will come.

Melky, no one is saying that Uconn cannot build fan support. My limited critique is to you and the other Uconn fans who denigrate other programs (see the "Division 2" comment above) that have attendance as good or BETTER than Uconn's and who just accept as some sort of given that Uconn will automatically rise above everyone else in the northeast.

In your earlier post, you claimed that BC's attendance fell because of its move to the ACC. That is just not true. BC's attendance dipped in 2005 and 2006 as a result of the DBS pricing which went into effect with the move to the ACC, which angered a lot lot of BC season ticket holders. I have friends which gave up their season tickets in protest. By 2007 and 2008, however, BC's attendance climbed back up to levels it had been for most of its time in the BE. Then came the Spaz era and the rest, as they say, is history.

It is somewhat humorous to see Uconn fans claim that BC's move to the ACC was a "big mistake" when at the same time their Administration and their fans are openly begging for a chance to make the same "big mistake."

I will reiterate what I said in my earlier post. BC has advantages in New England that Uconn will find hard to match...and not just the "Power 5" membership. BC is a private school, with a top level academic reputation, on campus facilities, a beautiful campus, and sits on the edge of Boston (the stadium actually sits in Boston). As a Jesuit institution, it has a pipeline to Jesuit HS's all over the country. For a student athlete wanting that type of experience, BC is one of a limited set of choices (after all, they cannot ALL go to Notre Dame...LOL).

With a new AD and coaching staff in place, we are beginning to see the resurgence. I noticed you did not comment on the whopping recruiting disparity between BC and Uconn so far this year. IMO, this is because BC FINALLY has a coaching staff that can actually sell BC's unique strengths. Time will tell.....but as a Uconn fan, this has to be worrying.

All good points. You don't have to sell me on BC. I was sold long ago and paid 4 years of tuition for one of my daughters to attend BC. I don't recall denigrating BC and wouldn't because I don't feel that way.

I don't know if the move to the ACC "caused" BC's decline in attendance, but the 2 coincided. To blame everything on Spaz ignores the fact that the attendance declined during 2 winning seasons in 2009-10 - 2 winning seasons which followed back-t0-back trips to the ACC championship game. Even if the past 2 seasons can be attributed to poor performance on the field, how do you explain those 2 seasons?

As for your humorous take on UConn fans complaining, I certainly didn't want to have anything to do with the ACC and I don't know any UConn fans who did. Frankly 10 years ago, none of us saw this kind of radical realignment occurring the way it has.

I was wrong, but I thought it was a mistake for BC to make the move back then. In retrospect, it has worked out to their advantage, but that doesn't mean that they haven't sacrificed a lot. Consider the following:

1. Lost an annual football game with Miami when they thought the ACC would build the rivalry.

2. Lost an annual football game in the NJ area (Rutgers/Temple) where a lot of their alums live.

3. Lost annual basketball trips to NY/NJ and the annual MSG tournament which provided access for a lot of their alums in NYC/LI as well as NJ.

4. Also lost trips to Syracuse & Pitt - less important in terms of alumni access but still access for some Northeastern alums.

5. Lost valuable basketball rivalries with a bunch of fellow Catholic school rivals up & down the East Coast including academic peers like Georgetown & Villanova as well as Notre Dame.

6. Football and basketball attendance have both declined for whatever reasons.

I know a lot of BC alums who miss those rivalries and who long for the old days. But times change. BC-Holy Cross was once THE big time BC rivalry and that's gone too. But the Holy cross rivalry was replaceable - especially as BC academics gained national stature.

However, you can't fix geography. BC is now cut off from its alumni base in the tri-state area. Maybe BC doesn't care, but that seems like a big deal to me and to a lot of the BC alums I know. I think that BC would have been better of pushing for and successfully achieving an all sports eastern league ten years ago than heading south where they're now in a division without Miami, without Georgia Tech, and without the academic blue bloods that they wanted to be associated with.

Of course UConn is worried. They should be. But it's not about a single recruiting class (recruiting success fluctuates from year to year). It's about the loss of BCS status and lack of major revenue streams. As for recruiting, they're not playing the same level of competition as BC is. You shouldn't be comparing your recruiting to us but to the rest of the ACC. UConn can develop into a Utah, Louisville, Boise State, or TCU if they can beat the teams on their schedule, which does not include BC. Unfortunately IMO.

I completely agree with you about BC's unique position. Too many fans are unaware of the extent to which a Catholic school network exists across much of the country and don't understand why this network is why the new Catholic Big East will flourish. BC and ND as the only football schools among this group do have a unique recruiting advantage.

But UConn also has a unique position. It is now recognized as without academic peer among the New England state universities. It is a top 20 public research university, so it too can recruit students to its beautiful rural campus with a unique portfolio. BC and UConn aren't really in competition with each other although BC for some reason has always been concerned about this. Both are capable of being just fine.

We have two different takes on this. I respect your opinion, I just don't think that the move to the ACC has been all that good for BC. Financially, it's been great and has proven to be the right move, but a lot has been lost in the process.

Melky - I respect your opinions. We will just have to agree to disagree. Only other points I wanted to make was on your list above.

1. BC actually benefitted by going to the ACC in terms of playing Miami. As you know, Miami was headed to the ACC with or without BC. Had BC not gone to the ACC, they would have no more games against Miami. By being in the ACC, they play Miami every 3 years which is a whole lot better than never playing them.

2. The annual games against RU and Temple? Please. For the most part, they were decidedly one-sided affairs which BC fans didn't much care about. RU, for example, was 6-19-1 against BC lifetime and 1-12-1 against BC in BE play. Does that sound like a series BC fans would miss?? Besides, RU is gone from the BE anyway after this year.

4. Non issue as BC will be resuming its series with SU and Pitt.

3 and 5. Agreed, BC probably lost something there for awhile However, the BB league that you describe no longer exists after this year. BC correctly stated back in 2003 that it didn't feel the BE, as it was being constructed, would be viable in the long-term. Time has proven them correct. So, again, this is a non-issue going forward - especially with Pitt and SU joining the ACC.

6. See my earlier point on attendance. For BB, BC attendance actually went up in the ACC - until the last few years (and that has everything to do with the product BC has put on the court. Hopefully, that will change, beginning this year. We shall see.)

Again, BC's actions were very much in the best interests of it Alums. Had they not taken the action when they did, BC might be where Uconn is today. They knew that the league you describe would eventually unravel as they felt the hybrid nature of the league would ultimately be its undoing (see the 2003 BE Meeting Minutes). BC pushed for an all sports league. When it was clear that was not going to happen, they indicated they would reach back out to the ACC. The rest is history.

As things stand now, BC does have regional rivals in the ACC. They have SU and Pitt. In addition, they have a lot new "rivals" in an area where the BC alumni population is fast growing - the Southeast. Conversely, what regional rivals does Uconn now have? I think we can both agree as to what the right course of action was for BC.

If the shoes were reversed, Uconn would have done EXACTLY the same thing. Deep down, you know this.

(05-27-2013 11:43 AM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  Of course you would rather think of FSU and Miami as rivals but you really aren't.

I'm well aware of that.

(05-27-2013 11:44 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 11:17 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 09:43 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 09:25 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 08:13 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  I agree that UConn does not have a future in the ACC, but I don't think that it's for reasons of football attendance. They are only 10-15 years into building their program. Their stadium was built with an expansion option. I see no reason why their attendance can't develop the same way that Rutgers' and Louisville's did as they invested and built their programs. Everything you're saying about UConn could be said about those 2 programs as little as a decade ago.

There are two aspects, interrelated of course, of building a football program: facilities and fan support. UConn is fortunate in that their state legislature has been willing to pour money into UConn athletic facilities at a time when legislatures in most states are cutting support for higher education. So that aspect seems to be pretty well covered and it gives UConn a leg up on just about all other AAC schools jockeying for P5 promotion.

Thus, the real issue for UConn in becoming "P5 ready" is fan support. And in that regard, the $64 question is "can UConn build real fan support while playing an AAC schedule"?

The doubts is out about that one ...

I don't understand the doubts about UConn building fan support. They only started this project 15 years ago and have less than 10 years at the BCS level. They've averaged 38,000 fans since they joined the Big East.

... but as i noted, they are not in the Big East anymore. They will not be hosting bigger names like Pitt, West Virginia, and Syracuse anymore. They will be hosting Temple, Memphis, Houston, and Tulsa, teams that their fan base probably has far less intrinsic interest in.

This is not a problem unique to UConn. USF has to deal with it as well. But I believe it is a very formidable issue, particularly for those of us that were in the Big East and whose fans got used to seeing the bigger-name opponents on the schedule. It is going to be very hard to avoid a decline in football attendance, much less build that attendance up to P5 levels.

I do not envy ticket marketers at places like USF, Cincy, and UConn, whose job it is to get season ticket holders to renew tickets for what is now an AAC schedule. That's a very tough sell, and yet we can't just avoid losing ticket sales, we need to significantly increase them so as to impress potential P5 partners.

I don't think that it's the big names that will draw fans to UConn home games. The program isn't at that level.

Yes, UConn has sold out against the name schools you mentioned, but they've also sold out in recent years in home games against Cincinnati, Virginia, and Vanderbilt.

What tells me more is that UConn had near sell outs within the past few years in back-to-back seasons against Rhode Island, an old time yankee Conference rival. What Uconn needs more than anything is rivalries, which is why the AAC decision to take Tulsa over UMass was so colossally bad for both UConn and the league.

The best thing that could happen for UConn would be to add UMass and for the State University of NY campuses at Stony Brook and Albany decide to grow their programs.

Yes, but problem is, the AAC is so spread out that adding a school that helps UConn build rivalries will almost surely be viewed as being of no help at all to other AAC schools. E.g., adding UCF helped USF (as much as some USF fans might not want to admit it), but adding Tulsa was as bad for us as it was for you. Tough situation to be in ...

The AAC is now set....the only thing they should concern themselves about is being the best of the GoF...with Cincinnati, South Florida, Central Florida, Houston & East Carolina that is highly possible....it all about winning that Access Bowl Slot.

The travel logistics don't stack up for the eastern schools. This is going to kill their budgets because of the ollies.

The conditions are right for a new "power" mid-major conference that isn't some frankenstein of crippled conference leftovers and D1AA sponsorship cases. There's meat to be had...problem is, I still don't think it helps UConn.

If I were the Czar of the ACC (until assassinated), I would do the following:


UConn as a full member. Cincinnati as a full member.

Georgetown as a full member except for football.

Navy for football only. Army for football only. ND stays the same.

18 members for both football and basketball.

How much would the Army/Navy game mean in TV dollars?

Get ESPN to pony up more money for all the tax breaks it gets from the state of Connecticut.

That closes the "gap" and helps with Northeast exposure. It might piss Jim Delany off. That would be a nice bonus.


This has little chance of happening. This is likely not feasible or profitable, I don't know.

This would likely cause me and my family to suffer the fate of Nicholas and his family at Ekaterinburg.

Still, this would be my idea for competing with the Big Ten for the Northeast instead of surrendering it to Jim Delany.

Now, about that Middle East peace plan.......

(05-28-2013 10:36 AM)TerryD Wrote:  If I were the Czar of the ACC (until assassinated), I would do the following:


UConn as a full member. Cincinnati as a full member.

Georgetown as a full member except for football.

Navy for football only. Army for football only. ND stays the same.

18 members for both football and basketball.

How much would the Army/Navy game mean in TV dollars?

Get ESPN to pony up more money for all the tax breaks it gets from the state of Connecticut.

That closes the "gap" and helps with Northeast exposure. It might piss Jim Delany off. That would be a nice bonus.


This has little chance of happening. This is likely not feasible or profitable, I don't know.

This would likely cause me and my family to suffer the fate of Nicholas and his family at Ekaterinburg.

Still, this would be my idea for competing with the Big Ten for the Northeast instead of surrendering it to Jim Delany.

Now, about that Middle East peace plan.......

But, but, but, Georgetown would never leave the nnnBE out of loyalty to the others.

Cheers,
Neil

But if Georgetown moved to the ACC, then the ACC would officially be a hybrid.
And as all of you are aware, this board has determined that the hybrid is evil and along with the C-7 caused the breakup of the Big East.

Summary: Hybrid equals Evil. Hybrid is worse than Hitler.

(05-28-2013 12:09 PM)billyjack Wrote:  But if Georgetown moved to the ACC, then the ACC would officially be a hybrid.
And as all of you are aware, this board has determined that the hybrid is evil and along with the C-7 caused the breakup of the Big East.

Summary: Hybrid equals Evil. Hybrid is worse than Hitler.

For many former BE posters, that is true. There are those of us who understood that a hybrid where the bb interests were not capable of blocking football interests such as existed in C-USA could possibly work.

Cheers,
Neil

(05-28-2013 10:36 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Georgetown as a full member except for football.

(05-28-2013 10:36 AM)TerryD Wrote:  If I were the Czar of the ACC (until assassinated), I would do the following:


UConn as a full member. Cincinnati as a full member.

Georgetown as a full member except for football.

Navy for football only. Army for football only. ND stays the same.

18 members for both football and basketball.

How much would the Army/Navy game mean in TV dollars?

Get ESPN to pony up more money for all the tax breaks it gets from the state of Connecticut.

That closes the "gap" and helps with Northeast exposure. It might piss Jim Delany off. That would be a nice bonus.


This has little chance of happening. This is likely not feasible or profitable, I don't know.

This would likely cause me and my family to suffer the fate of Nicholas and his family at Ekaterinburg.

Still, this would be my idea for competing with the Big Ten for the Northeast instead of surrendering it to Jim Delany.

Now, about that Middle East peace plan.......

No offense TerryD, but I sure am glad you are not the Czar of the ACC!

(05-28-2013 07:48 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-28-2013 10:36 AM)TerryD Wrote:  If I were the Czar of the ACC (until assassinated), I would do the following:


UConn as a full member. Cincinnati as a full member.

Georgetown as a full member except for football.

Navy for football only. Army for football only. ND stays the same.

18 members for both football and basketball.

How much would the Army/Navy game mean in TV dollars?

Get ESPN to pony up more money for all the tax breaks it gets from the state of Connecticut.

That closes the "gap" and helps with Northeast exposure. It might piss Jim Delany off. That would be a nice bonus.


This has little chance of happening. This is likely not feasible or profitable, I don't know.

This would likely cause me and my family to suffer the fate of Nicholas and his family at Ekaterinburg.

Still, this would be my idea for competing with the Big Ten for the Northeast instead of surrendering it to Jim Delany.

Now, about that Middle East peace plan.......

No offense TerryD, but I sure am glad you are not the Czar of the ACC!

авайте выпьем за успех нашего дел!!!!!




(Let us drink to the success of the partnership!!)

(05-28-2013 07:48 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-28-2013 10:36 AM)TerryD Wrote:  If I were the Czar of the ACC (until assassinated), I would do the following:


UConn as a full member. Cincinnati as a full member.

Georgetown as a full member except for football.

Navy for football only. Army for football only. ND stays the same.

18 members for both football and basketball.

How much would the Army/Navy game mean in TV dollars?

Get ESPN to pony up more money for all the tax breaks it gets from the state of Connecticut.

That closes the "gap" and helps with Northeast exposure. It might piss Jim Delany off. That would be a nice bonus.


This has little chance of happening. This is likely not feasible or profitable, I don't know.

This would likely cause me and my family to suffer the fate of Nicholas and his family at Ekaterinburg.

Still, this would be my idea for competing with the Big Ten for the Northeast instead of surrendering it to Jim Delany.

Now, about that Middle East peace plan.......

No offense TerryD, but I sure am glad you are not the Czar of the ACC!

Ditto

(05-28-2013 08:40 PM)texasorange Wrote:  

(05-28-2013 07:48 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-28-2013 10:36 AM)TerryD Wrote:  If I were the Czar of the ACC (until assassinated), I would do the following:


UConn as a full member. Cincinnati as a full member.

Georgetown as a full member except for football.

Navy for football only. Army for football only. ND stays the same.

18 members for both football and basketball.

How much would the Army/Navy game mean in TV dollars?

Get ESPN to pony up more money for all the tax breaks it gets from the state of Connecticut.

That closes the "gap" and helps with Northeast exposure. It might piss Jim Delany off. That would be a nice bonus.


This has little chance of happening. This is likely not feasible or profitable, I don't know.

This would likely cause me and my family to suffer the fate of Nicholas and his family at Ekaterinburg.

Still, this would be my idea for competing with the Big Ten for the Northeast instead of surrendering it to Jim Delany.

Now, about that Middle East peace plan.......

No offense TerryD, but I sure am glad you are not the Czar of the ACC!

Ditto

So you 2 guys would be funding the assassin that takes Terry out?

(05-27-2013 08:13 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 12:46 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  UConn's problem now will always be Uconn's problem. The football schools in the ACC see absolutely no redeeming value in adding UConn in the past, now, or in the future because UConn football will be a bigger draw on ACC football than they will ever add.

Really?

UConn's attendance has been identical to BC's over the past 5 years. I guess you're saying that the ACC regrets the addition of BC. Their attendance is way better than Wake and Duke. It's not much different than Syracuse in the past couple of years.

So, who are the "football schools" in the ACC who control the league's business? Do they have a majority? With the GOR, they no longer hold the threat of defection. The rest of the league can do whatever it wants.

I agree that UConn does not have a future in the ACC, but I don't think that it's for reasons of football attendance. They are only 10-15 years into building their program. Their stadium was built with an expansion option. I see no reason why their attendance can't develop the same way that Rutgers' and Louisville's did as they invested and built their programs. Everything you're saying about UConn could be said about those 2 programs as little as a decade ago.

It's not attendance, but if that makes you feel better then by all means hold on to that just as strong as your entire fanbase has held on to the belief that BC was the one blocking you. Pointing out your attendance is better than BC, Wake, or Duke is asinine because they are already members of the ACC.

This is a big reason why your weren't, and will not be invited to the ACC:

}&Player.Hometown.State.Key=48&Player.Hometown.State.Key.Source=/State/AutoComplete&Player.Hometown.State.Key.Value={%22values%22:[{%22id%22:%2248%22,%22name%22:%22Connecticut%20%28CT%29%22}]}&Recruitment.Enabled=False&PlayerSport.PlayerInstitution.Institution.Key.Source=/Institution/AutoComplete?Type.Max=JuniorCollege&RecruitInterests.Institution.Key.Source=/Institution/AutoComplete?Type=College&RecruitInterests.RecruitedBy.Key.Source=/Coach/AutoComplete]24/7 2014 CT recruits

Three three star recruits and eight unrated recruits. South Carolina, with only 1 million more in population, produced more four star recruits than you produced DI level recruits.

}&Player.Hometown.State.Key=6&Player.Hometown.State.Key.Source=/State/AutoComplete&Player.Hometown.State.Key.Value={%22values%22:[{%22id%22:%226%22,%22name%22:%22South%20Carolina%20%28SC%29%22}]}&Recruitment.Enabled=False&PlayerSport.PlayerInstitution.Institution.Key.Source=/Institution/AutoComplete?Type.Max=JuniorCollege&RecruitInterests.Institution.Key.Source=/Institution/AutoComplete?Type=College&RecruitInterests.RecruitedBy.Key.Source=/Coach/AutoComplete]24/7 South Carolina recruits


Your demographics work against you beyond recruiting. Once you get past Pennsylvania nobody really cares about college football anyway.