I think that most posters are missing the point. This isn't about UConn.

From the outset of Big Ten expansion, numerous reports indicated that their focus was on NYC and that Notre Dame was the lynch pin. When Notre Dame didn't happen, their were reports about Atlanta, the Tidewater region, Texas, etc. The addition of Rutgers and the office in NYC seems to confirm that NYC was their target.

The issue really isn't about whether UConn is a good add. Opinions will vary. The issue is about competition. If the ACC continues its efforts to get into the NYC market as they already are, will the Big Ten sit back, or will they do something to lock that market up even more than they already have with Rutgers. OTOH, will the ACC continue to make a push into the NY market with its closest member more than 200 miles away in Boston and its next closest member more than 250 miles away in Syracuse?

People can argue 'til the cows come home about how worthy UConn is and how much of the NY market they bring, but the fact is that there are only 2 major players in the Tri-state NY region. There is no major all sports school in NYC or in the NY suburbs. Rutgers was the obvious place to start, but if the Big Ten wants to tighten its grip on the market to gain even greater visibility and to push the ACC out, there is only one other school that can help them do that. And if the ACC truly wants to get into the NY market, there is only one school that gives them any kind of a local flavor.

The Metro North commuter rail in the Fairfield-New Have corridor runs through 2 counties in southwestern Connecticut that have half the state's population. It is a virtual suburb of NYC. That is UConn country. Connecticut people work in NY and New Yorkers work in Connecticut. It isn't New England the way that Boston or Maine are. The Big XII no longer has a school in Houston, but that doesn't mean that the University of Texas doesn't loom large there. UConn is closer to NYC than UT is to Houston. The University of Illinois isn't in Chicago and Ohio state isn't in Cleveland, UNC isn't in Charlotte. They all have a major presence in those cities. UConn is closer to NYC than all of them.

The Big Ten has a lot of experience with being the talk of the town in Chicago because it is the center of the universe for so many Big Ten alums. If the conference wants to replicate that in NY, adding UConn to Rutgers, Penn State and the other alums in the try-state region is a way of doing that in NY AND it is a way of preventing the ACC from becoming any kind of a local rival.

if this were just about the potential about UConn for a P5 slot, I would think that it's at least 8-10 years away and it may be never. But this is very quickly becoming about a battle for control of the NY market and that completely changes the dynamics of the decision making - just as it did when the ACC grabbed Pitt due to rumors that the Big XII had plans to expand east with a Pitt-West Virginia twosome, and just as it did when the Florida State, Georgia Tech, Clemson leverage for Louisville football increased in the face of rumors that they were being courted by the Big XII.

(04-14-2014 03:13 PM)S11 Wrote:  If UConn was more marketable in football they'd be a legit contender for expansion. Their football brand value to the networks is their big issue right now.

The budget is outstanding for a Go5 school, hoops is among the best, has a good market, and it has proximity to NYC on top of that.

The football brand value for television really isn't the issue. The Big Ten made that clear when they brought in Rutgers.The Big Ten has a product to sell, which is Big Ten football as a total package in all of its markets, not School X in one market and School Y in another.

Hank made the point very effectively earlier in this thread. The Big Ten will be assessing its return on the Rutgers investment over the next 2-3 years. They will also be assessing the competition in the market from the ACC. If they're happy with those results, then nothing may happen. But if they haven't achieved their objectives OR if the ACC is gaining a foothold, then adding UConn would be done as a strategic move to enhance the Rutgers investment and/or to block the ACC. At this point, capturing the NY market is the issue, whatever that takes.

(04-14-2014 03:45 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 03:13 PM)S11 Wrote:  If UConn was more marketable in football they'd be a legit contender for expansion. Their football brand value to the networks is their big issue right now.

The budget is outstanding for a Go5 school, hoops is among the best, has a good market, and it has proximity to NYC on top of that.

The football brand value for television really isn't the issue. The Big Ten made that clear when they brought in Rutgers.The Big Ten has a product to sell, which is Big Ten football as a total package in all of its markets, not School X in one market and School Y in another.

Hank made the point very effectively earlier in this thread. The Big Ten will be assessing its return on the Rutgers investment over the next 2-3 years. They will also be assessing the competition in the market from the ACC. If they're happy with those results, then nothing may happen. But if they haven't achieved their objectives OR if the ACC is gaining a foothold, then adding UConn would be done as a strategic move to enhance the Rutgers investment and/or to block the ACC. At this point, capturing the NY market is the issue, whatever that takes.

I was referring to the Big 12 and ACC primarily. The BTN does shift things for the B1G relative to the other leagues.

Regarding UConn, the B1G and ACC can afford to wait and evaluate the situation. Eventually it may come to a head where one or the other makes its move, and then it'll be up to the other to try to counter.

The only other P5 conference that's a real possibility is the Big 12 (I doubt anyone would argue UConn for the SEC or PAC). Due to the losses they've sustained they're the most in need of good expansion candidates, but they're just not a great fit. It's somewhat of a Catch-22 with them - it would be more attractive for them to invite UConn (and for a hoops-centric school like UConn to accept the invitation) if they'd been able to expand into the Northeast/Ohio Valley with the likes of Pitt and Louisville, other basketball powers who would be attractive to UConn. But without them, what they have to offer is adding KU to UConn's schedule (which could be brokered as an OOC game in any case) and otherwise adding far-away games against schools for whom football is the primary focus. But, if the Big 12 had succeeded in landing those schools, not only would their need for more content be reduced, it would also open up slots in the ACC, which is more desirable to UConn in the first place due to geography and culture. Even if UConn did accept an invitation now, there'd probably be a sense that they're biding their time, and while there aren't any illusions in the Big 12 about pecking order, I do think the current members do realize that some level of cohesion is valuable.

Part of me completely buys the arguments that from the start Texas (and perhaps to a lesser extent Oklahoma) wanted to avoid Northeast expansion to keep their options open, and that the old Big 12 North schools were against it because it could limit their exposure in TX. On the other hand, I also wonder if back-channel talks may have gone further than some would lead the public to believe, and that the likes of Pitt and Louisville used that to help leverage invitations to the league they really wanted to join in the first place. For all the Big 12 bashing that goes on at times, I don't think that it's so much that "the Big 12 sucks" as it is that there were simply more attractive options for those schools that weren't ever entirely at home in the Big East for whatever reason, and therefore it wasn't that the Big 12 didn't consider expansion with those candidates, it was just that they ended up being the bridesmaid rather than the bride.

I am not certain that the ACC will see the "wisdom" of adding UConn to fight the Big Ten for the elusive (and perhaps non-existent) "control" of NYC.

If UConn can add about $22 million for themselves and extra revenue for everyone else, cool.

Maybe, just maybe it will be enough to break even with UConn's addition just to stick a finger in Jim Delany's eye, I don't know.

If UConn cannot generate that much revenue, why do it?

Can they? That is the issue. $$$

(04-14-2014 05:17 PM)TerryD Wrote:  I am not certain that the ACC will see the "wisdom" of adding UConn to fight the Big Ten for the elusive (and perhaps non-existent) "control" of NYC.

If UConn can add about $22 million for themselves and extra revenue for everyone else, cool.

Maybe, just maybe it will be enough to break even with UConn's addition just to stick a finger in Jim Delany's eye, I don't know.

If UConn cannot generate that much revenue, why do it?

Can they? That is the issue. $$$

I just don't see the B1G competing with the ACC for a New York market, especially if UConn and Rutgers are the pawns in the battle. Fact is, that wouldn't be a battle, it would be a skirmish. The enemy is the NFL, not the ACC. In that war, neither the Knights nor the Huskies move the needle very far.

I've heard it suggested that there are a lot of B1G alums living in the NY area, and that's a large reason why the B1G is interested. If that's the case, they could have expanded the BTN into that market without adding anybody.

I can't help but think talk of the B1G and ACC bidding against each other for UConn's services down the road is just a fantasy of their fans.

(04-14-2014 03:35 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  People can argue 'til the cows come home about how worthy UConn is and how much of the NY market they bring, but the fact is that there are only 2 major players in the Tri-state NY region. There is no major all sports school in NYC or in the NY suburbs. Rutgers was the obvious place to start, but if the Big Ten wants to tighten its grip on the market to gain even greater visibility and to push the ACC out, there is only one other school that can help them do that. And if the ACC truly wants to get into the NY market, there is only one school that gives them any kind of a local flavor.

I think the ACC already has the access to the NYC market that they desire via Syracuse. IMO, you significantly underestimate Syracuse's presence in NYC. They are more "local flavor" than UConn. When UConn sells out the Garden, it's primarily because hordes of UConn fans from Connecticut travel there. Here's a quote about UConn's presence in NYC:

"The distance between the University of Connecticut in Storrs and New York City is only about 140 miles, a fairly quick drive. But sometimes it seems as though the two locations are on different planets."

That's from a UConn alumni page, btw, not from some rivals. UConn is culturally very distant from NYC and it is inaccurate to describe UConn as being a "major player" there. In contrast, Syracuse, despite the greater geographical distance, is much closer to NYC's athletic culture. There is a much greater indigenous NYC interest in Syracuse basketball than UConn basketball, and ditto for football*.

As for the B1G, they have that same access via Rutgers, which also is culturally far closer to NYC than is UConn.

Would UConn add some incremental value to either the B1G's or ACC's presence in NYC? Sure. But IMO probably not nearly enough to justify the $22+ million annual cost (UConn's split of P5 revenues).


*This is on a small scale, of course. Truth is, NYC is a pro sports town and no colleges have much indigenous interest compared with the interest in the NFL, MLB, NHL, and NBA.

the NYC market is multiple schools ==> no one school delivers that market

even if the b10 had uconn the majority of their NYC presence would still come from the likes of RU, PSU, & michigan.

(04-14-2014 06:34 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 03:35 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  People can argue 'til the cows come home about how worthy UConn is and how much of the NY market they bring, but the fact is that there are only 2 major players in the Tri-state NY region. There is no major all sports school in NYC or in the NY suburbs. Rutgers was the obvious place to start, but if the Big Ten wants to tighten its grip on the market to gain even greater visibility and to push the ACC out, there is only one other school that can help them do that. And if the ACC truly wants to get into the NY market, there is only one school that gives them any kind of a local flavor.

I think the ACC already has the access to the NYC market that they desire via Syracuse. IMO, you significantly underestimate Syracuse's presence in NYC. They are more "local flavor" than UConn. When UConn sells out the Garden, it's primarily because hordes of UConn fans from Connecticut travel there. Here's a quote about UConn's presence in NYC:

"The distance between the University of Connecticut in Storrs and New York City is only about 140 miles, a fairly quick drive. But sometimes it seems as though the two locations are on different planets."

That's from a UConn alumni page, btw, not from some rivals. UConn is culturally very distant from NYC and it is inaccurate to describe UConn as being a "major player" there. In contrast, Syracuse, despite the greater geographical distance, is culturally much closer to NYC's athletic culture.

As for the B1G, they have that same access via Rutgers, which also is culturally far closer to NYC than is UConn.

Would UConn add some incremental value to either the B1G's or ACC's presence in NYC? Sure. But IMO probably not nearly enough to justify the $22 million annual cost (UConn's split of P5 revenues).

i think this is it in a nut shell. no disrespect to uconn but culturally they are hartford/rural new england. while I wouldn't go as far to say that new yorkers & new englanders are cultural rivals......

it has always been my opinion that new yorkers in general are more embracive of NJ residents, pennsylvanians, & upstaters. plus those schools have had a couple extra decades of d1 FB to build up their NYC presence.

(04-14-2014 06:46 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 06:34 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 03:35 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  People can argue 'til the cows come home about how worthy UConn is and how much of the NY market they bring, but the fact is that there are only 2 major players in the Tri-state NY region. There is no major all sports school in NYC or in the NY suburbs. Rutgers was the obvious place to start, but if the Big Ten wants to tighten its grip on the market to gain even greater visibility and to push the ACC out, there is only one other school that can help them do that. And if the ACC truly wants to get into the NY market, there is only one school that gives them any kind of a local flavor.

I think the ACC already has the access to the NYC market that they desire via Syracuse. IMO, you significantly underestimate Syracuse's presence in NYC. They are more "local flavor" than UConn. When UConn sells out the Garden, it's primarily because hordes of UConn fans from Connecticut travel there. Here's a quote about UConn's presence in NYC:

"The distance between the University of Connecticut in Storrs and New York City is only about 140 miles, a fairly quick drive. But sometimes it seems as though the two locations are on different planets."

That's from a UConn alumni page, btw, not from some rivals. UConn is culturally very distant from NYC and it is inaccurate to describe UConn as being a "major player" there. In contrast, Syracuse, despite the greater geographical distance, is culturally much closer to NYC's athletic culture.

As for the B1G, they have that same access via Rutgers, which also is culturally far closer to NYC than is UConn.

Would UConn add some incremental value to either the B1G's or ACC's presence in NYC? Sure. But IMO probably not nearly enough to justify the $22 million annual cost (UConn's split of P5 revenues).

i think this is it in a nut shell. no disrespect to uconn but culturally they are hartford/rural new england. while I wouldn't go as far to say that new yorkers & new englanders are cultural rivals......

it has always been my opinion that new yorkers in general are more embracive of NJ residents, pennsylvanians, & upstaters. plus those schools have had a couple extra decades of d1 FB to build up their NYC presence.

You do realize that there is more to CT than Hartford right? He, half the state moves around by train, that hardly sounds lime a different planet.

(04-14-2014 07:13 PM)uconnwhaler Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 06:46 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 06:34 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 03:35 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  People can argue 'til the cows come home about how worthy UConn is and how much of the NY market they bring, but the fact is that there are only 2 major players in the Tri-state NY region. There is no major all sports school in NYC or in the NY suburbs. Rutgers was the obvious place to start, but if the Big Ten wants to tighten its grip on the market to gain even greater visibility and to push the ACC out, there is only one other school that can help them do that. And if the ACC truly wants to get into the NY market, there is only one school that gives them any kind of a local flavor.

I think the ACC already has the access to the NYC market that they desire via Syracuse. IMO, you significantly underestimate Syracuse's presence in NYC. They are more "local flavor" than UConn. When UConn sells out the Garden, it's primarily because hordes of UConn fans from Connecticut travel there. Here's a quote about UConn's presence in NYC:

"The distance between the University of Connecticut in Storrs and New York City is only about 140 miles, a fairly quick drive. But sometimes it seems as though the two locations are on different planets."

That's from a UConn alumni page, btw, not from some rivals. UConn is culturally very distant from NYC and it is inaccurate to describe UConn as being a "major player" there. In contrast, Syracuse, despite the greater geographical distance, is culturally much closer to NYC's athletic culture.

As for the B1G, they have that same access via Rutgers, which also is culturally far closer to NYC than is UConn.

Would UConn add some incremental value to either the B1G's or ACC's presence in NYC? Sure. But IMO probably not nearly enough to justify the $22 million annual cost (UConn's split of P5 revenues).

i think this is it in a nut shell. no disrespect to uconn but culturally they are hartford/rural new england. while I wouldn't go as far to say that new yorkers & new englanders are cultural rivals......

it has always been my opinion that new yorkers in general are more embracive of NJ residents, pennsylvanians, & upstaters. plus those schools have had a couple extra decades of d1 FB to build up their NYC presence.

You do realize that there is more to CT than Hartford right? He, half the state moves around by train, that hardly sounds lime a different planet.

i am not talking about the state of CT I am talking about a school called uconn who plays the majority of their athletic events in hartford/storrs.

you can push any point you want, but espn NY lists 15 college teams and uconn isn't one of them. SUs NYC presence comes from having fans stationed there. uconns NYC presence comes from having fans who travel there.

(04-14-2014 02:44 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 02:40 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 02:25 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 10:59 AM)esayem Wrote:  Connecticut is in New England, not New York.

The New England market has approximately 16 million people with only one public flagship school worthy of P5 consideration. It's only "competitor" in New England is Boston College, a P5 school that is both private and Catholic and has limited appeal.

A very wise realignment guru once wrote: "Is there enough interest in college sports in New England to make having 2 NE schools profitable for the ACC? The answer was a resounding NO!

But 4 schools in a state of 9.75 million is...

There's always some stupid stuff that comes from UConn posters whenever a conference move is discussed but this one always takes the cake.

Which state is the ACC looking at adding three or more schools from? That's the only way your statement makes a lick of sense. The NC schools are all charter members of the ACC so the fact that all four are in NC has absolutely no bearing on the statement that XLance made. Once again instead of countering an argument a UConn poster makes an attack because they don't have anything to counter it with. If either A. there were interest in New England or B. UConn really was a draw to residents of NYC they would already be in the P5 and they wouldn't be drawing a little as they do in their rinky-dink off-campus stadium.

(04-14-2014 05:33 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 05:17 PM)TerryD Wrote:  I am not certain that the ACC will see the "wisdom" of adding UConn to fight the Big Ten for the elusive (and perhaps non-existent) "control" of NYC.

If UConn can add about $22 million for themselves and extra revenue for everyone else, cool.

Maybe, just maybe it will be enough to break even with UConn's addition just to stick a finger in Jim Delany's eye, I don't know.

If UConn cannot generate that much revenue, why do it?

Can they? That is the issue. $$$

I just don't see the B1G competing with the ACC for a New York market, especially if UConn and Rutgers are the pawns in the battle. Fact is, that wouldn't be a battle, it would be a skirmish. The enemy is the NFL, not the ACC. In that war, neither the Knights nor the Huskies move the needle very far.

I've heard it suggested that there are a lot of B1G alums living in the NY area, and that's a large reason why the B1G is interested. If that's the case, they could have expanded the BTN into that market without adding anybody.

I can't help but think talk of the B1G and ACC bidding against each other for UConn's services down the road is just a fantasy of their fans.

Found this information on NYC College Media Market:

Rutgers was attractive to the Big Ten because the school will enable the conference to place its cable network on carriers in the New York-New Jersey market. New York, of course, is a professional sports town — a study last year by Nate Silver of The New York Times found that just 14 percent of the market follows college football.

But Silver also found that although Rutgers had about 600,000 fans in the New York market (20 percent share of the market), UConn (5.2 percent) was fourth behind Notre Dame (9.2) and Penn State (6.4). So while New York might not be a college sports market, UConn does resonate.

(04-14-2014 07:26 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 02:44 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 02:40 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 02:25 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 10:59 AM)esayem Wrote:  Connecticut is in New England, not New York.

The New England market has approximately 16 million people with only one public flagship school worthy of P5 consideration. It's only "competitor" in New England is Boston College, a P5 school that is both private and Catholic and has limited appeal.

A very wise realignment guru once wrote: "Is there enough interest in college sports in New England to make having 2 NE schools profitable for the ACC? The answer was a resounding NO!

But 4 schools in a state of 9.75 million is...

There's always some stupid stuff that comes from UConn posters whenever a conference move is discussed but this one always takes the cake.

Which state is the ACC looking at adding three or more schools from? That's the only way your statement makes a lick of sense. The NC schools are all charter members of the ACC so the fact that all four are in NC has absolutely no bearing on the statement that XLance made. Once again instead of countering an argument a UConn poster makes an attack because they don't have anything to counter it with. If either A. there were interest in New England or B. UConn really was a draw to residents of NYC they would already be in the P5 and they wouldn't be drawing a little as they do in their rinky-dink off-campus stadium.

Lol the point stands whether a Uconn fan or one of your Acc brethren made it. There are sixteen million people being represented by one p5 school and there is evidence that a state with less than ten can support four. No one said anything about anything else in your post.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(04-14-2014 07:26 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 02:44 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 02:40 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 02:25 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 10:59 AM)esayem Wrote:  Connecticut is in New England, not New York.

The New England market has approximately 16 million people with only one public flagship school worthy of P5 consideration. It's only "competitor" in New England is Boston College, a P5 school that is both private and Catholic and has limited appeal.

A very wise realignment guru once wrote: "Is there enough interest in college sports in New England to make having 2 NE schools profitable for the ACC? The answer was a resounding NO!

But 4 schools in a state of 9.75 million is...

There's always some stupid stuff that comes from UConn posters whenever a conference move is discussed but this one always takes the cake.

Which state is the ACC looking at adding three or more schools from? That's the only way your statement makes a lick of sense. The NC schools are all charter members of the ACC so the fact that all four are in NC has absolutely no bearing on the statement that XLance made. Once again instead of countering an argument a UConn poster makes an attack because they don't have anything to counter it with. If either A. there were interest in New England or B. UConn really was a draw to residents of NYC they would already be in the P5 and they wouldn't be drawing a little as they do in their rinky-dink off-campus stadium.

(04-14-2014 05:33 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 05:17 PM)TerryD Wrote:  I am not certain that the ACC will see the "wisdom" of adding UConn to fight the Big Ten for the elusive (and perhaps non-existent) "control" of NYC.

If UConn can add about $22 million for themselves and extra revenue for everyone else, cool.

Maybe, just maybe it will be enough to break even with UConn's addition just to stick a finger in Jim Delany's eye, I don't know.

If UConn cannot generate that much revenue, why do it?

Can they? That is the issue. $$$

I just don't see the B1G competing with the ACC for a New York market, especially if UConn and Rutgers are the pawns in the battle. Fact is, that wouldn't be a battle, it would be a skirmish. The enemy is the NFL, not the ACC. In that war, neither the Knights nor the Huskies move the needle very far.

I've heard it suggested that there are a lot of B1G alums living in the NY area, and that's a large reason why the B1G is interested. If that's the case, they could have expanded the BTN into that market without adding anybody.

I can't help but think talk of the B1G and ACC bidding against each other for UConn's services down the road is just a fantasy of their fans.

I agree with everything that you wrote.

Would UConn's hypothetical invitation to the ACC create/generate additional revenues to the conference in excess of, say, $20 million (a current share for UConn) a year?

Would it be an addition that nets any additional money to the current ACC members on top of UConn's own share?

Who would be the other school to join or would the ACC go to fifteen members in football, sixteen in basketball?

Those are the only questions that are relevant to UConn's hopes to join the ACC. Correct?

(04-14-2014 06:34 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 03:35 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  People can argue 'til the cows come home about how worthy UConn is and how much of the NY market they bring, but the fact is that there are only 2 major players in the Tri-state NY region. There is no major all sports school in NYC or in the NY suburbs. Rutgers was the obvious place to start, but if the Big Ten wants to tighten its grip on the market to gain even greater visibility and to push the ACC out, there is only one other school that can help them do that. And if the ACC truly wants to get into the NY market, there is only one school that gives them any kind of a local flavor.

I think the ACC already has the access to the NYC market that they desire via Syracuse. IMO, you significantly underestimate Syracuse's presence in NYC. They are more "local flavor" than UConn. When UConn sells out the Garden, it's primarily because hordes of UConn fans from Connecticut travel there. Here's a quote about UConn's presence in NYC:

"The distance between the University of Connecticut in Storrs and New York City is only about 140 miles, a fairly quick drive. But sometimes it seems as though the two locations are on different planets."

That's from a UConn alumni page, btw, not from some rivals. UConn is culturally very distant from NYC and it is inaccurate to describe UConn as being a "major player" there. In contrast, Syracuse, despite the greater geographical distance, is much closer to NYC's athletic culture. There is a much greater indigenous NYC interest in Syracuse basketball than UConn basketball, and ditto for football*.

As for the B1G, they have that same access via Rutgers, which also is culturally far closer to NYC than is UConn.

Would UConn add some incremental value to either the B1G's or ACC's presence in NYC? Sure. But IMO probably not nearly enough to justify the $22+ million annual cost (UConn's split of P5 revenues).


*This is on a small scale, of course. Truth is, NYC is a pro sports town and no colleges have much indigenous interest compared with the interest in the NFL, MLB, NHL, and NBA.

I guess SNY made a big mistake when they decided to carry UConn games, right? No interest?

(04-14-2014 09:47 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 06:34 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 03:35 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  People can argue 'til the cows come home about how worthy UConn is and how much of the NY market they bring, but the fact is that there are only 2 major players in the Tri-state NY region. There is no major all sports school in NYC or in the NY suburbs. Rutgers was the obvious place to start, but if the Big Ten wants to tighten its grip on the market to gain even greater visibility and to push the ACC out, there is only one other school that can help them do that. And if the ACC truly wants to get into the NY market, there is only one school that gives them any kind of a local flavor.

I think the ACC already has the access to the NYC market that they desire via Syracuse. IMO, you significantly underestimate Syracuse's presence in NYC. They are more "local flavor" than UConn. When UConn sells out the Garden, it's primarily because hordes of UConn fans from Connecticut travel there. Here's a quote about UConn's presence in NYC:

"The distance between the University of Connecticut in Storrs and New York City is only about 140 miles, a fairly quick drive. But sometimes it seems as though the two locations are on different planets."

That's from a UConn alumni page, btw, not from some rivals. UConn is culturally very distant from NYC and it is inaccurate to describe UConn as being a "major player" there. In contrast, Syracuse, despite the greater geographical distance, is much closer to NYC's athletic culture. There is a much greater indigenous NYC interest in Syracuse basketball than UConn basketball, and ditto for football*.

As for the B1G, they have that same access via Rutgers, which also is culturally far closer to NYC than is UConn.

Would UConn add some incremental value to either the B1G's or ACC's presence in NYC? Sure. But IMO probably not nearly enough to justify the $22+ million annual cost (UConn's split of P5 revenues).


*This is on a small scale, of course. Truth is, NYC is a pro sports town and no colleges have much indigenous interest compared with the interest in the NFL, MLB, NHL, and NBA.

I guess SNY made a big mistake when they decided to carry UConn games, right? No interest?

Who said no interest? Just not nearly enough to justify a $20+ million a year payout.

(04-14-2014 09:39 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Would UConn's hypothetical invitation to the ACC create/generate additional revenues to the conference in excess of, say, $20 million (a current share for UConn) a year?

Would it be an addition that nets any additional money to the current ACC members on top of UConn's own share?

Who would be the other school to join or would the ACC go to fifteen members in football, sixteen in basketball?

Those are the only questions that are relevant to UConn's hopes to join the ACC. Correct?

that and questions over 4-5 "hell no" votes from the northern & southern schools.