(05-07-2014 12:26 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  I'd go with "wait and see". The Big Ten will be a decade integrating the last expansion, so check back in the early 2020's and see what is available.

IMO, that is exactly correct, Bruce. To add TWO schools means that the Conference would have to significantly increase revenues to increase the per school revenue share for each memeber. (IMO, they would not add schools just to keep these shares flat.) Since, IMO, the risk of betting wrong means potentially a measurable reduction in the per school shares over time (I don't think they are going to kick anyone out of the Conference), I think they will wait and make sure that their projections are sound.

IMO, this won't be an easy process or decision. If we were talking about a ND or Texas - sure, a no-brainer in my opinion. For pretty much everyone else, not so clear, IMO.

The other variable, with regard to per-team payout, is for how long the incoming team would accept a pro-rated portion of the payout.

Neither but i do like cornell. Buffalo could have some potential given the midwest nature of buffalo if they made a few changes i.e. new york state U. I do think the acc should add UCONN though.

(05-07-2014 12:58 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  The B10 has zero interest in BC. That school has no impact in the Boston market and a tiny stadium.

UConn needs to get the AAU status done and they would be very compelling.

Getting AAU status "done" is a lot easier said than done ... dozens of schools have AAU status in their academic development goals, and obviously they can't all get to the level in various rankings to boot out dozens of existing AAU members ...

... but, yeah, it would help UConn's case in getting into the ACC, and it would help UConn's case for being a #16 for the Big Ten in the event that a compelling #15 becomes available and the Big Ten needs a school to even things up.

First and foremost UConn needs to play better FB on a more consistent basis, but second after that on their "P5 realignment bait" to-do list would be AAU status.

Obviously a change in revenue sport income flows where a majority of BBall media value is diverted into paying NCAA overheads and into various NCAA subsidies could change that. If the BBall income flows stopped cross-subsidizing FB, or even if it was reversed so FB started cross-subsidizing BBall, that might change that, given UConn's BBall status ... but that can't be taken into a realignment projection unless and until it actually happens.

(05-07-2014 01:30 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  Tiny stadium? Its at 44.5K. (Bigger than Uconn's stadium, BTW).

With respect to the Big Ten, that would be tiny, as in would come in substantially smaller than Northwestern's stadium to be the smallest in the conference. The comparison to UConn just means that UConn's is tinier.

Rutgers and Maryland will be pulling down the Big Ten average, but at least they won't be pulling down the Big Ten minimum size.

Quote: Oh, and finally, BC has no interest in joining the B1G.

You buried the lede ... this is normally all you have to have to eliminate a school from contention.

And I think the Big Ten could be MUCH better off in the long run going after Kansas and Missouri. This would improve the conference in both basketball and football along with bringing them into markets passionate about a variety of sports. Not to mention they contiguous with current member states.

And before Uconn fans start crying here is why I say this. Uconn adds a lot of value in basketball however, their football would be at best a joke in the conference. College football is probably never going to be popular in New York. If their goal is to become New York's new Big East in college basketball they can do that with basketball only additions.

It would be a absolute home run for the Big Ten if they could land Missouri, Kansas, St Johns, and Villanova.

(05-07-2014 02:27 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  And I think the Big Ten could be MUCH better off in the long run going after Kansas and Missouri. This would improve the conference in both basketball and football along with bringing them into markets passionate about a variety of sports. Not to mention they contiguous with current member states.

And before Uconn fans start crying here is why I say this. Uconn adds a lot of value in basketball however, their football would be at best a joke in the conference. College football is probably never going to be popular in New York. If their goal is to become New York's new Big East in college basketball they can do that with basketball only additions.

It would be a absolute home run for the Big Ten if they could land Missouri, Kansas, St Johns, and Villanova.

I just don't see Mizzou leaving the SEC. UConn FBall has really not been that bad and they get fans despite the bad recent performance, somewhat difficult location, average schedule and New England college FBall apathy. I still believe the B10 would trade UConn for Rutgers, the Rutgers pick just came at the worst time for UConn. UConn knows that FBall has cost them literally tens of millions, they will get it straightened out.

Kansas is a slam dunk. I just don't see the B10 doing any type of hybrid.

(05-07-2014 12:35 AM)p53 Wrote:  Based on tv exposure and ability to capture northeast market share . Who is a better addition BC or UConn.

Neither. Between Rutgers, Penn State, and Maryland, the B1G is already doing very well in the northeast corridor.

I'd like to see SUNY-Buffalo take Maryland's place in the Big Ten.

(05-07-2014 02:35 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(05-07-2014 01:52 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(05-07-2014 01:30 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(05-07-2014 12:58 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  The B10 has zero interest in BC. That school has no impact in the Boston market and a tiny stadium.

UConn needs to get the AAU status done and they would be very compelling.

Nonsense.

Do you live in Boston? Have you spent time in Boston? Or is your opinion based on what people tell you. BC does have an impact in Boston. BC sits in the 7th largest media market and gets very good ratings and has an impact in Boston: See below:

http://www.goodbullhunting.com/2013/12/4...m-missouri

Or this:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2012/1...story.html

Tiny stadium? Its at 44.5K. (Bigger than Uconn's stadium, BTW).

Funny how a Tulane fan would be knocking the size of anyone's stadium.

Oh, and finally, BC has no interest in joining the BiG.

My mother and two best friends went to BC. My family still has season tics. I grew up in boston and lived in newton for 6 years. BC matters very little, you are burying your head in the sand. The B10 has no interest in BC, hell the aac membership would prob trade Uconn for BC. UConn puts more actual butt sin the seats despite playing a far worse schedule. The moment they get a B10 invite they will expand. The B10 has very little presence in Boston, unlike NYC.
What does my allegiance to Tulane have to do with anything, what a cheap simpleton response. Grow up.

Interesting post...you knock BC as having a "tiny stadium"...yet....BC's stadium is about one-third larger than Tulane's new stadium. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yulman_Stadium

Thats's why I made the mention of you being a Tulane fan. Then you get snippy that I point that out? Get a clue!

So, your experience with Boston/BC is that your mother and friends went to BC sometime in the past and you spent part of your childhood in the Boston area. That sums up your Boston experience? How often have you been there in the last decade, or two decades? How many times have you been to a BC game?

I attached a link to the actual TV numbers showing BC's television appeal......you offer nothing but an opinion. (BTW, take a look at where BC and Uconn sit in the ratings in that article.)

I gave you a link to a column from the most experienced sports reporter in Boston - an article chock full with facts and statisitcs. You offer nothing but an opinion.

Uconn puts more buts in the seats than BC? Not according to the NCAA. Check their stats for the 2 years and even these numbers may be high based what has recently been reported in the CT media:

http://touch.courant.com/#section/-1/art...-80101827/

You make the assumption that Uconn would expand their stadium if they got a BiG invite. Maybe they would. But you just assume that BC (if they wanted a BiG invitation), would not expand their stadium as well if such an invite was secured? On what basis do you make that assumption?

This is not a knock on Uconn at all. Just refuting the unsupported nonsense that you have posted.

I am sorry, but when you make statements that are refuted by FACTS; and when presented with the facts you double down on the statements, you look foolish.

RE: Boston college's tv ratings vs. UConn's, numbers without context are deceiving. The BC sample size included 4 games on ABC and a bowl game on ESPN. UConn's sample size includes one game on ABC (against Michigan) and 3 games on ESPNU. The highest rated game on ESPNU last year was a .6 and that includes several national brand football schools: WVU, A&M, Miami etc. etc.

I don't care which two teams you are comparing, if one is on ABC and the other in on ESPNU the ABC numbers are going to dwarf the ESPNU #'s.

UConn vs. Michigan on ABC did a 3.5
Michigan Vs. Michigan State on ABC did a 3.3
Michigan VS. Nebraska on ABC did a 3.1
Michigan vs. Ohio state on ABC did a 5.8


Boston College VS. FSU on ABC did a 1.9
FSU vs. Clemson on ABC did a 3.4
FSU vs. NC State did a 2.2
FSU vs. Miami did a 5.1

The reason I'm using FSU and Michigan as baselines is because they both get several prime time games on ABC. If you use them and the network as the constant variables and look at how the ratings fluctuate with who they are playing it helps tell some of the story. The network and opponent are so important when it comes to measuring the viewership of a school that simply comparing the raw numbers is misleading.

(05-07-2014 03:08 PM)OkaForPrez Wrote:  

(05-07-2014 02:35 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(05-07-2014 01:52 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(05-07-2014 01:30 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(05-07-2014 12:58 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  The B10 has zero interest in BC. That school has no impact in the Boston market and a tiny stadium.

UConn needs to get the AAU status done and they would be very compelling.

Nonsense.

Do you live in Boston? Have you spent time in Boston? Or is your opinion based on what people tell you. BC does have an impact in Boston. BC sits in the 7th largest media market and gets very good ratings and has an impact in Boston: See below:

http://www.goodbullhunting.com/2013/12/4...m-missouri

Or this:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2012/1...story.html

Tiny stadium? Its at 44.5K. (Bigger than Uconn's stadium, BTW).

Funny how a Tulane fan would be knocking the size of anyone's stadium.

Oh, and finally, BC has no interest in joining the BiG.

My mother and two best friends went to BC. My family still has season tics. I grew up in boston and lived in newton for 6 years. BC matters very little, you are burying your head in the sand. The B10 has no interest in BC, hell the aac membership would prob trade Uconn for BC. UConn puts more actual butt sin the seats despite playing a far worse schedule. The moment they get a B10 invite they will expand. The B10 has very little presence in Boston, unlike NYC.
What does my allegiance to Tulane have to do with anything, what a cheap simpleton response. Grow up.

Interesting post...you knock BC as having a "tiny stadium"...yet....BC's stadium is about one-third larger than Tulane's new stadium. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yulman_Stadium

Thats's why I made the mention of you being a Tulane fan. Then you get snippy that I point that out? Get a clue!

So, your experience with Boston/BC is that your mother and friends went to BC sometime in the past and you spent part of your childhood in the Boston area. That sums up your Boston experience? How often have you been there in the last decade, or two decades? How many times have you been to a BC game?

I attached a link to the actual TV numbers showing BC's television appeal......you offer nothing but an opinion. (BTW, take a look at where BC and Uconn sit in the ratings in that article.)

I gave you a link to a column from the most experienced sports reporter in Boston - an article chock full with facts and statisitcs. You offer nothing but an opinion.

Uconn puts more buts in the seats than BC? Not according to the NCAA. Check their stats for the 2 years and even these numbers may be high based what has recently been reported in the CT media:

http://touch.courant.com/#section/-1/art...-80101827/

You make the assumption that Uconn would expand their stadium if they got a BiG invite. Maybe they would. But you just assume that BC (if they wanted a BiG invitation), would not expand their stadium as well if such an invite was secured? On what basis do you make that assumption?

This is not a knock on Uconn at all. Just refuting the unsupported nonsense that you have posted.

I am sorry, but when you make statements that are refuted by FACTS; and when presented with the facts you double down on the statements, you look foolish.

RE: Boston college's tv ratings vs. UConn's, numbers without context are deceiving. The BC sample size included 4 games on ABC and a bowl game on ESPN. UConn's sample size includes one game on ABC (against Michigan) and 3 games on ESPNU. The highest rated game on ESPNU last year was a .6 and that includes several national brand football schools: WVU, A&M, Miami etc. etc.

I don't care which two teams you are comparing, if one is on ABC and the other in on ESPNU the ABC numbers are going to dwarf the ESPNU #'s.

UConn vs. Michigan on ABC did a 3.5
Michigan Vs. Michigan State on ABC did a 3.3
Michigan VS. Nebraska on ABC did a 3.1
Michigan vs. Ohio state on ABC did a 5.8


Boston College VS. FSU on ABC did a 1.9
FSU vs. Clemson on ABC did a 3.4
FSU vs. NC State did a 2.2
FSU vs. Miami did a 5.1

The reason I'm using FSU and Michigan as baselines is because they both get several prime time games on ABC. If you use them and the network as the constant variables and look at how the ratings fluctuate with who they are playing it helps tell some of the story. The network and opponent are so important when it comes to measuring the viewership of a school that simply comparing the raw numbers is misleading.

Ya, comparing an AAC ESPNU schedule to ABC ACC schedule is crazy talk, and UConn had one of it's worst years in a decade.

The point is alumni base, competition in their market, the B10 presence in their given market.....and the B10 is fine in FBall, they need Bball rating and let's just say UConn has a slight advantage there.

The idea of BC to the B10 just seems ludicrous to me.

The Big could go after a combination of Notre Dame and Boston College, which would result in Connecticut to the ACC.

(05-07-2014 03:08 PM)OkaForPrez Wrote:  

(05-07-2014 02:35 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(05-07-2014 01:52 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(05-07-2014 01:30 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(05-07-2014 12:58 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  The B10 has zero interest in BC. That school has no impact in the Boston market and a tiny stadium.

UConn needs to get the AAU status done and they would be very compelling.

Nonsense.

Do you live in Boston? Have you spent time in Boston? Or is your opinion based on what people tell you. BC does have an impact in Boston. BC sits in the 7th largest media market and gets very good ratings and has an impact in Boston: See below:

http://www.goodbullhunting.com/2013/12/4...m-missouri

Or this:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2012/1...story.html

Tiny stadium? Its at 44.5K. (Bigger than Uconn's stadium, BTW).

Funny how a Tulane fan would be knocking the size of anyone's stadium.

Oh, and finally, BC has no interest in joining the BiG.

My mother and two best friends went to BC. My family still has season tics. I grew up in boston and lived in newton for 6 years. BC matters very little, you are burying your head in the sand. The B10 has no interest in BC, hell the aac membership would prob trade Uconn for BC. UConn puts more actual butt sin the seats despite playing a far worse schedule. The moment they get a B10 invite they will expand. The B10 has very little presence in Boston, unlike NYC.
What does my allegiance to Tulane have to do with anything, what a cheap simpleton response. Grow up.

Interesting post...you knock BC as having a "tiny stadium"...yet....BC's stadium is about one-third larger than Tulane's new stadium. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yulman_Stadium

Thats's why I made the mention of you being a Tulane fan. Then you get snippy that I point that out? Get a clue!

So, your experience with Boston/BC is that your mother and friends went to BC sometime in the past and you spent part of your childhood in the Boston area. That sums up your Boston experience? How often have you been there in the last decade, or two decades? How many times have you been to a BC game?

I attached a link to the actual TV numbers showing BC's television appeal......you offer nothing but an opinion. (BTW, take a look at where BC and Uconn sit in the ratings in that article.)

I gave you a link to a column from the most experienced sports reporter in Boston - an article chock full with facts and statisitcs. You offer nothing but an opinion.

Uconn puts more buts in the seats than BC? Not according to the NCAA. Check their stats for the 2 years and even these numbers may be high based what has recently been reported in the CT media:

http://touch.courant.com/#section/-1/art...-80101827/

You make the assumption that Uconn would expand their stadium if they got a BiG invite. Maybe they would. But you just assume that BC (if they wanted a BiG invitation), would not expand their stadium as well if such an invite was secured? On what basis do you make that assumption?

This is not a knock on Uconn at all. Just refuting the unsupported nonsense that you have posted.

I am sorry, but when you make statements that are refuted by FACTS; and when presented with the facts you double down on the statements, you look foolish.

RE: Boston college's tv ratings vs. UConn's, numbers without context are deceiving. The BC sample size included 4 games on ABC and a bowl game on ESPN. UConn's sample size includes one game on ABC (against Michigan) and 3 games on ESPNU. The highest rated game on ESPNU last year was a .6 and that includes several national brand football schools: WVU, A&M, Miami etc. etc.

I don't care which two teams you are comparing, if one is on ABC and the other in on ESPNU the ABC numbers are going to dwarf the ESPNU #'s.

UConn vs. Michigan on ABC did a 3.5
Michigan Vs. Michigan State on ABC did a 3.3
Michigan VS. Nebraska on ABC did a 3.1
Michigan vs. Ohio state on ABC did a 5.8


Boston College VS. FSU on ABC did a 1.9
FSU vs. Clemson on ABC did a 3.4
FSU vs. NC State did a 2.2
FSU vs. Miami did a 5.1

The reason I'm using FSU and Michigan as baselines is because they both get several prime time games on ABC. If you use them and the network as the constant variables and look at how the ratings fluctuate with who they are playing it helps tell some of the story. The network and opponent are so important when it comes to measuring the viewership of a school that simply comparing the raw numbers is misleading.

Oka....I agree that ratings like this are not the perfect vehicle to measure one team vs. another. You are correct in stating there are differences between, say, ESPNU and ABC. There are also differences between when the game is played. For example, you compared Michigan-Uconn, which was on in prime time (8pm start) to BC-FSU which had a 3:30 start). Typically, the prime time game is going to do much better.

My primary purpose for citing the numbers was to rebut the absurd comments by the OP that BC had no impact in Boston. While you can nitpick at the numbers, in the whole they show that BC has very good ratings and the OP's comments were nonsense.

(05-07-2014 03:27 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(05-07-2014 03:08 PM)OkaForPrez Wrote:  

(05-07-2014 02:35 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(05-07-2014 01:52 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(05-07-2014 01:30 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  Nonsense.

Do you live in Boston? Have you spent time in Boston? Or is your opinion based on what people tell you. BC does have an impact in Boston. BC sits in the 7th largest media market and gets very good ratings and has an impact in Boston: See below:

http://www.goodbullhunting.com/2013/12/4...m-missouri

Or this:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2012/1...story.html

Tiny stadium? Its at 44.5K. (Bigger than Uconn's stadium, BTW).

Funny how a Tulane fan would be knocking the size of anyone's stadium.

Oh, and finally, BC has no interest in joining the BiG.

My mother and two best friends went to BC. My family still has season tics. I grew up in boston and lived in newton for 6 years. BC matters very little, you are burying your head in the sand. The B10 has no interest in BC, hell the aac membership would prob trade Uconn for BC. UConn puts more actual butt sin the seats despite playing a far worse schedule. The moment they get a B10 invite they will expand. The B10 has very little presence in Boston, unlike NYC.
What does my allegiance to Tulane have to do with anything, what a cheap simpleton response. Grow up.

Interesting post...you knock BC as having a "tiny stadium"...yet....BC's stadium is about one-third larger than Tulane's new stadium. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yulman_Stadium

Thats's why I made the mention of you being a Tulane fan. Then you get snippy that I point that out? Get a clue!

So, your experience with Boston/BC is that your mother and friends went to BC sometime in the past and you spent part of your childhood in the Boston area. That sums up your Boston experience? How often have you been there in the last decade, or two decades? How many times have you been to a BC game?

I attached a link to the actual TV numbers showing BC's television appeal......you offer nothing but an opinion. (BTW, take a look at where BC and Uconn sit in the ratings in that article.)

I gave you a link to a column from the most experienced sports reporter in Boston - an article chock full with facts and statisitcs. You offer nothing but an opinion.

Uconn puts more buts in the seats than BC? Not according to the NCAA. Check their stats for the 2 years and even these numbers may be high based what has recently been reported in the CT media:

http://touch.courant.com/#section/-1/art...-80101827/

You make the assumption that Uconn would expand their stadium if they got a BiG invite. Maybe they would. But you just assume that BC (if they wanted a BiG invitation), would not expand their stadium as well if such an invite was secured? On what basis do you make that assumption?

This is not a knock on Uconn at all. Just refuting the unsupported nonsense that you have posted.

I am sorry, but when you make statements that are refuted by FACTS; and when presented with the facts you double down on the statements, you look foolish.

RE: Boston college's tv ratings vs. UConn's, numbers without context are deceiving. The BC sample size included 4 games on ABC and a bowl game on ESPN. UConn's sample size includes one game on ABC (against Michigan) and 3 games on ESPNU. The highest rated game on ESPNU last year was a .6 and that includes several national brand football schools: WVU, A&M, Miami etc. etc.

I don't care which two teams you are comparing, if one is on ABC and the other in on ESPNU the ABC numbers are going to dwarf the ESPNU #'s.

UConn vs. Michigan on ABC did a 3.5
Michigan Vs. Michigan State on ABC did a 3.3
Michigan VS. Nebraska on ABC did a 3.1
Michigan vs. Ohio state on ABC did a 5.8


Boston College VS. FSU on ABC did a 1.9
FSU vs. Clemson on ABC did a 3.4
FSU vs. NC State did a 2.2
FSU vs. Miami did a 5.1

The reason I'm using FSU and Michigan as baselines is because they both get several prime time games on ABC. If you use them and the network as the constant variables and look at how the ratings fluctuate with who they are playing it helps tell some of the story. The network and opponent are so important when it comes to measuring the viewership of a school that simply comparing the raw numbers is misleading.

Oka....I agree that ratings like this are not the perfect vehicle to measure one team vs. another. You are correct in stating there are differences between, say, ESPNU and ABC. There are also differences between when the game is played. For example, you compared Michigan-Uconn, which was on in prime time (8pm start) to BC-FSU which had a 3:30 start). Typically, the prime time game is going to do much better.

My primary purpose for citing the numbers was to rebut the absurd comments by the OP that BC had no impact in Boston. While you can nitpick at the numbers, in the whole they show that BC has very good ratings and the OP's comments were nonsense.

That's a fair point. 8 pm timeslot is worth a 1.4x bump on the 3:30 slot.

(05-07-2014 03:18 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  The Big could go after a combination of Notre Dame and Boston College, which would result in Connecticut to the ACC.

And if pigs weren't afraid of heights they could fly, if they had wings with strong enough muscles to achieve lift-off.

ND & the Big Ten are like a romantic comedy that never got made because in the end the couple never actually got together. When ND wanted into the Big Ten, there were always one or more Big Ten schools blocking it, and by the time the Big Ten wanted ND, ND had already become firmly attached to their independent status.

But ND is one example of a school that the Big Ten would treat as "good enough" academically without actually being a member of the AAU.

Big Ten moneyhogs will NEVER pick Kansas over B.C and/or UCONN. It is all about television sets.

Even though B.C is weak. By locking up UCONN or BC, Big Ten Network will be locked up in all cable channels from Maine to Virginia.

The real infatuation is in the South.

The two biggest BIG TEN targets are

1. TEXAS
2. Georgia Tech

Going back to this thread.

Either UCONN or B.C. will end up in the BIG TEN eventually. The bridesmaid will be in the ACC i.e. if BIG TEN picks B.C. UCONN will take B.C.'s place.

Anyone that says B.C. is happy in the ACC doesn't realize how much more money and stable the BIG TEN is compared to the ACC.

BC would make 2-3 times more money in the Big TEN. And it is a much better academic fit.

Just like in real life.

Some people marry for $$$.

B.C. will not say NO to $$$.

(05-08-2014 03:42 PM)p53 Wrote:  Just like in real life.

Some people marry for $$$.

B.C. will not say NO to $$$.

BC is not a research university and BC will not become an AAU school.

UConn does not either have a great tv market or AAU membership.
Its football stadium is off campus and seats 40k.Its football attendance last year was 22k.

The Big 10 is not interested in a MAC program with a poor tv market.

(05-08-2014 03:41 PM)p53 Wrote:  Big Ten moneyhogs will NEVER pick Kansas over B.C and/or UCONN. It is all about television sets.

Even though B.C is weak. By locking up UCONN or BC, Big Ten Network will be locked up in all cable channels from Maine to Virginia.

The real infatuation is in the South.

The two biggest BIG TEN targets are

1. TEXAS
2. Georgia Tech

Targets in a wishlist sense, or targets in a strategic thinking sense?

In terms of strategic targets, it seems likely that UVA is ahead of Texas, since its a more realistic pick-up possibility in the 20's when expiration of the current ACC GOR starts to come onto the horizon.

(05-08-2014 04:54 PM)Rich52c Wrote:  

(05-08-2014 03:42 PM)p53 Wrote:  Just like in real life.

Some people marry for $$$.

B.C. will not say NO to $$$.

BC is not a research university and BC will not become an AAU school.

UConn does not either have a great tv market or AAU membership.
Its football stadium is off campus and seats 40k.Its football attendance last year was 22k.

The Big 10 is not interested in a MAC program with a poor tv market.

Rich, you must be trolling us with "UConn" as the team you root for because you don't seem to know much.

First, UConn doesn't have a good TV market? Connecticut together is the #21 TV market that is dominated by one school.

Second, 22,000 was the attendance at a single game - the last game (December 8th against bad Memphis, playing our worst football ever). And UConn counts butts-in-seats, not tickets sold (we had 28k season tickets last year). The average "butts-in-seats" was about 34k last year, which is not terrible. If we counted tickets sold it would have been closer to 37k for a team that went 3-9.