(07-14-2023 12:00 PM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote:  

(07-14-2023 11:59 AM)Titans3775 Wrote:  

(07-14-2023 11:57 AM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote:  

(07-14-2023 11:49 AM)Titans3775 Wrote:  Nothing says worthy addition like a .245 win percentage in the last 10 years. Truly a great add and very deserving.

They’ve also won TWO men’s basketball championships in the same ten years, so there’s that.

They could have won 10 out of 10 and wouldn't be worth anymore money than they are today with their high school football team.

I don’t think Brett Yormark shares your view.

He may not, but there is a reason much larger fanbase schools like Duke and Kansas aren't on any conference's bucket list.

(07-14-2023 11:49 AM)Titans3775 Wrote:  Nothing says worthy addition like a .245 win percentage in the last 10 years. Truly a great add and very deserving.

Statistics often tell us more about the poster. First, that isn't any different than Colorado or Arizona over the same time frame, but I've yet to hear a single complaint about them.

And you cut the line right before the following seasons: 9-4, 8-5, 8-5, 8-5 in the Big East and a run of about 10 years of sellouts. We had disastrous hires, no doubt. But the idea that Arizona/Colorado are different in recent history is unsupportable.

I don't know if UConn ends up in the Big 12 or not. I'm in favor of it but I understand the resistance on both sides. Either way, I think UConn will ultimately be recognized rightfully as the top college AD in the Northeast region of the United States. This will include greater success in football and continuing to compete for and win national championships in men's and women's hoops. I think Hockey will break though soon and baseball will keep chugging along.

(07-14-2023 12:02 PM)uconnwhaler Wrote:  

(07-14-2023 11:49 AM)Titans3775 Wrote:  Nothing says worthy addition like a .245 win percentage in the last 10 years. Truly a great add and very deserving.

Statistics often tell us more about the poster. First, that isn't any different than Colorado or Arizona over the same time frame, but I've yet to hear a single complaint about them.

And you cut the line right before the following seasons: 9-4, 8-5, 8-5, 8-5 in the Big East and a run of about 10 years of sellouts. We had disastrous hires, no doubt. But the idea that Arizona/Colorado are different in recent history is unsupportable.

They are massive state schools in areas that care about football? They are in the footprint? They are easy pro-rata additions? Picking them off destabilizes the BIG12s biggest nemesis? So yea like a million reasons they are better adds than UConn.

What you did more than 10 years ago has absolutely zero bearing on today. UConn almost dropped football not even 5 years ago. The Big12 would be sooooo stupid to even consider them.

(07-14-2023 12:09 PM)Titans3775 Wrote:  

(07-14-2023 12:02 PM)uconnwhaler Wrote:  

(07-14-2023 11:49 AM)Titans3775 Wrote:  Nothing says worthy addition like a .245 win percentage in the last 10 years. Truly a great add and very deserving.

Statistics often tell us more about the poster. First, that isn't any different than Colorado or Arizona over the same time frame, but I've yet to hear a single complaint about them.

And you cut the line right before the following seasons: 9-4, 8-5, 8-5, 8-5 in the Big East and a run of about 10 years of sellouts. We had disastrous hires, no doubt. But the idea that Arizona/Colorado are different in recent history is unsupportable.

They are massive state schools in areas that care about football? They are in the footprint? They are easy pro-rata additions? Picking them off destabilizes the BIG12s biggest nemesis? So yea like a million reasons they are better adds than UConn.

What you did more than 10 years ago has absolutely zero bearing on today. UConn almost dropped football not even 5 years ago. The Big12 would be sooooo stupid to even consider them.

This is fan fiction that exists only on this board. Football isn't going anywhere and you've clearly never checked our facilities.

I also pointed out that we sold out our building for 10 straight years. We put a putrid product on the field and attendance reflected it. Mora has that under control.

And is the Pac really their biggest nemesis? UConn puts them squarely into ACC territory...apparently that has no value. And we are almost certainly a pro-rata add...if we aren't, that is a deal-breaker.

(07-14-2023 12:09 PM)Titans3775 Wrote:  

(07-14-2023 12:02 PM)uconnwhaler Wrote:  

(07-14-2023 11:49 AM)Titans3775 Wrote:  Nothing says worthy addition like a .245 win percentage in the last 10 years. Truly a great add and very deserving.

Statistics often tell us more about the poster. First, that isn't any different than Colorado or Arizona over the same time frame, but I've yet to hear a single complaint about them.

And you cut the line right before the following seasons: 9-4, 8-5, 8-5, 8-5 in the Big East and a run of about 10 years of sellouts. We had disastrous hires, no doubt. But the idea that Arizona/Colorado are different in recent history is unsupportable.

They are massive state schools in areas that care about football? They are in the footprint? They are easy pro-rata additions? Picking them off destabilizes the BIG12s biggest nemesis? So yea like a million reasons they are better adds than UConn.

What you did more than 10 years ago has absolutely zero bearing on today. UConn almost dropped football not even 5 years ago. The Big12 would be sooooo stupid to even consider them.

That's a lie about nearly dropping football. It's just BS made up on forums like this. What UConn did 10 years ago in the Big East is definitely relevant to gauging the football program's potential. Arguing otherwise is asinine.

(07-14-2023 12:11 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(07-14-2023 12:09 PM)Titans3775 Wrote:  

(07-14-2023 12:02 PM)uconnwhaler Wrote:  

(07-14-2023 11:49 AM)Titans3775 Wrote:  Nothing says worthy addition like a .245 win percentage in the last 10 years. Truly a great add and very deserving.

Statistics often tell us more about the poster. First, that isn't any different than Colorado or Arizona over the same time frame, but I've yet to hear a single complaint about them.

And you cut the line right before the following seasons: 9-4, 8-5, 8-5, 8-5 in the Big East and a run of about 10 years of sellouts. We had disastrous hires, no doubt. But the idea that Arizona/Colorado are different in recent history is unsupportable.

They are massive state schools in areas that care about football? They are in the footprint? They are easy pro-rata additions? Picking them off destabilizes the BIG12s biggest nemesis? So yea like a million reasons they are better adds than UConn.

What you did more than 10 years ago has absolutely zero bearing on today. UConn almost dropped football not even 5 years ago. The Big12 would be sooooo stupid to even consider them.

That's a lie about nearly dropping football. It's just BS made up on forums like this. What UConn did 10 years ago in the Big East is definitely relevant to gauging the football program's potential. Arguing otherwise is asinine.

Well in that case, your 0.390 all time win percentage is also relevant to show that UConn football has always sucked. That puts you 129th out of 133 teams. Truly something to brag about.

(07-14-2023 10:41 AM)uconnwhaler Wrote:  Let's get it on the record - UConn to the Big12?

Yes

I say "no", but I admit my bias - I'm a Big East fan who doesn't want them to.

I've been a Memphis fan since I attended my first Tiger football game in 1968. I want Memphis to be invited to join the Big 12 — and I feel the university, the athletic program and the city of Memphis are reasonably qualified and deserving (though with some admitted deficiencies). If based solely on football, Memphis is a better choice than UConn for the Big 12.

But this is a big-picture move for the Big 12 and UConn would bring lots to the Big 12 table. Some posters trash the Husky football program. So be it. But how they conveniently overlook all the positives UConn would offer the Big 12 is almost baffling. Conference realignment is not about football only. Otherwise, the Big Ten would not have added UCLA.

Yes, UConn offers flaws. But I can fully understand why the Big 12 might be interested. I feel many of the UConn haters know this. They simply can't stomach admitting it.

(07-14-2023 11:57 AM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote:  

(07-14-2023 11:49 AM)Titans3775 Wrote:  Nothing says worthy addition like a .245 win percentage in the last 10 years. Truly a great add and very deserving.

They’ve also won TWO men’s basketball championships in the same ten years, so there’s that.

And one other NCAAT game total over the other 8 years. They're the Vinnie Johnson of NCAA Basketball.

(07-14-2023 12:19 PM)Titans3775 Wrote:  

(07-14-2023 12:11 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(07-14-2023 12:09 PM)Titans3775 Wrote:  

(07-14-2023 12:02 PM)uconnwhaler Wrote:  

(07-14-2023 11:49 AM)Titans3775 Wrote:  Nothing says worthy addition like a .245 win percentage in the last 10 years. Truly a great add and very deserving.

Statistics often tell us more about the poster. First, that isn't any different than Colorado or Arizona over the same time frame, but I've yet to hear a single complaint about them.

And you cut the line right before the following seasons: 9-4, 8-5, 8-5, 8-5 in the Big East and a run of about 10 years of sellouts. We had disastrous hires, no doubt. But the idea that Arizona/Colorado are different in recent history is unsupportable.

They are massive state schools in areas that care about football? They are in the footprint? They are easy pro-rata additions? Picking them off destabilizes the BIG12s biggest nemesis? So yea like a million reasons they are better adds than UConn.

What you did more than 10 years ago has absolutely zero bearing on today. UConn almost dropped football not even 5 years ago. The Big12 would be sooooo stupid to even consider them.

That's a lie about nearly dropping football. It's just BS made up on forums like this. What UConn did 10 years ago in the Big East is definitely relevant to gauging the football program's potential. Arguing otherwise is asinine.

Well in that case, your 0.390 all time win percentage is also relevant to show that UConn football has always sucked. That puts you 129th out of 133 teams. Truly something to brag about.

The whole history is relevant. Not arguing anything different. However, when in a power conference, the program succeeded. That will always be a fact. If it gets back into a power conference, will see if that history repeats.

It's also a fact that UConn has two of the most storied hoops programs of all time and that the overall athletic department competes at a high level. It all has to be taken into account.

(07-14-2023 10:53 AM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  I have no hatred for UConn. But they have almost zero value to the B12.

The crazy ex girlfriend who keeps showing up to your parties dating old friends who haven't figured up she's bunny-cooker nuts yet.

(07-14-2023 12:27 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(07-14-2023 12:19 PM)Titans3775 Wrote:  

(07-14-2023 12:11 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(07-14-2023 12:09 PM)Titans3775 Wrote:  

(07-14-2023 12:02 PM)uconnwhaler Wrote:  Statistics often tell us more about the poster. First, that isn't any different than Colorado or Arizona over the same time frame, but I've yet to hear a single complaint about them.

And you cut the line right before the following seasons: 9-4, 8-5, 8-5, 8-5 in the Big East and a run of about 10 years of sellouts. We had disastrous hires, no doubt. But the idea that Arizona/Colorado are different in recent history is unsupportable.

They are massive state schools in areas that care about football? They are in the footprint? They are easy pro-rata additions? Picking them off destabilizes the BIG12s biggest nemesis? So yea like a million reasons they are better adds than UConn.

What you did more than 10 years ago has absolutely zero bearing on today. UConn almost dropped football not even 5 years ago. The Big12 would be sooooo stupid to even consider them.

That's a lie about nearly dropping football. It's just BS made up on forums like this. What UConn did 10 years ago in the Big East is definitely relevant to gauging the football program's potential. Arguing otherwise is asinine.

Well in that case, your 0.390 all time win percentage is also relevant to show that UConn football has always sucked. That puts you 129th out of 133 teams. Truly something to brag about.

The whole history is relevant. Not arguing anything different. However, when in a power conference, the program succeeded. That will always be a fact. If it gets back into a power conference, will see if that history repeats.

It's also a fact that UConn has two of the most storied hoops programs of all time and that the overall athletic department competes at a high level. It all has to be taken into account.

The program also hit its lowest point more recently in a G5 conference and averages 20k fans a game. I'm not arguing UConn basketball isn't great, but basketball means absolutely nothing in realignment and I suspect it won't this time either.

(07-14-2023 12:26 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I've been a Memphis fan since I attended my first Tiger football game in 1968. I want Memphis to be invited to join the Big 12 — and I feel the university, the athletic program and the city of Memphis are reasonably qualified and deserving (though with some admitted deficiencies). If based solely on football, Memphis is a better choice than UConn for the Big 12.

But this is a big-picture move for the Big 12 and UConn would bring lots to the Big 12 table. Some posters trash the Husky football program. So be it. But how they conveniently overlook all the positives UConn would offer the Big 12 is almost baffling. Conference realignment is not about football only. Otherwise, the Big Ten would not have added UCLA.

Yes, UConn offers flaws. But I can fully understand why the Big 12 might be interested. I feel many of the UConn haters know this. They simply can't stomach admitting it.

Bill, UConn and Gonzaga are good additions for the Big 12 in that hoops will not remain shackled to the past much longer. But, this is a bridge game that is being played in the Big 12. They cannot afford to add UConn and Gonzaga before they add the Arizona schools, or Utah, or Colorado. The four G5 schools with which they expanded were the top tier G5 programs, but for state flagship AAU schools they are not a lure, but a disincentive. Yormark must finesse at least one of the PAC schools to get more to come. After that happens is the time to add Gonzaga and UConn as hoops additions. You get the others in first to raise the conference profile and then you sell the added revenue from enhanced hoops in an already solid hoops conference. These next set of moves for the Big 12 will determine whether they become the third best conference or the 5th. And the order in which those cards are played will determine whether they win or get set.

(07-14-2023 12:26 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I've been a Memphis fan since I attended my first Tiger football game in 1968. I want Memphis to be invited to join the Big 12 — and I feel the university, the athletic program and the city of Memphis are reasonably qualified and deserving (though with some admitted deficiencies). If based solely on football, Memphis is a better choice than UConn for the Big 12.

But this is a big-picture move for the Big 12 and UConn would bring lots to the Big 12 table. Some posters trash the Husky football program. So be it. But how they conveniently overlook all the positives UConn would offer the Big 12 is almost baffling. Conference realignment is not about football only. Otherwise, the Big Ten would not have added UCLA.

Yes, UConn offers flaws. But I can fully understand why the Big 12 might be interested. I feel many of the UConn haters know this. They simply can't stomach admitting it.

If UConn offered decent or even average g5 football it would be one thing, but they're probably the worst g5 football program of the past decade. UCLA is pretty good at football, not great but probably about equal to an average current B1G program. That's partly why I say that I think that the big 12 will wait on UConn, they're the classic "not now but not never" school. Improve football enthusiasm, get yourselves a stadium, keep winning at basketball, and they're probably at the front of the line next time, or if not for the big 12 then for the ACC.

No. The Big 12 cannot offer them the stage the Big East offers. They suffered from losing that stage when in the American, and would be no different in the Big 12.

UCONN's success is tied to the region it is in. It just is. That's not a great region for football. It is what it is.

I think UCONN learned its lesson last time. They stay in the Big East. It's their home.

(07-14-2023 12:32 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(07-14-2023 12:26 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I've been a Memphis fan since I attended my first Tiger football game in 1968. I want Memphis to be invited to join the Big 12 — and I feel the university, the athletic program and the city of Memphis are reasonably qualified and deserving (though with some admitted deficiencies). If based solely on football, Memphis is a better choice than UConn for the Big 12.

But this is a big-picture move for the Big 12 and UConn would bring lots to the Big 12 table. Some posters trash the Husky football program. So be it. But how they conveniently overlook all the positives UConn would offer the Big 12 is almost baffling. Conference realignment is not about football only. Otherwise, the Big Ten would not have added UCLA.

Yes, UConn offers flaws. But I can fully understand why the Big 12 might be interested. I feel many of the UConn haters know this. They simply can't stomach admitting it.

If UConn offered decent or even average g5 football it would be one thing, but they're probably the worst g5 football program of the past decade. UCLA is pretty good at football, not great but probably about equal to an average current B1G program. That's partly why I say that I think that the big 12 will wait on UConn, they're the classic "not now but not never" school. Improve football enthusiasm, get yourselves a stadium, keep winning at basketball, and they're probably at the front of the line next time, or if not for the big 12 then for the ACC.

I don't expect the stadium situation to change. Rentschler Field is UConn's stadium. It was specifically built for UConn football which is its only tenant. The only potential change would be expansion of Rentschler Field. I know some UConn fans disagree and think we need to put effort into getting an on campus stadium but I'm fine with the way things are.

My evaluation is that the ACC in the 2030s (possibly sooner) is more likely:

I see there being the potential that 20, rather 24, is the next step in Big 10/SEC expansion. The ACC would likely lose 4-5 full members, plus non-fb ND. That leaves the ACC reduced, but not facing impending doom. I can see the some of the schools left behind resistant to the idea of joining a nationwide Big 12 and prefer to maintain an Eastern footprint. WVU/Cincy/UCF would probably top the list of preferred ACC replacements, but if they say no, USF/UConn/Memphis would be the next ones up.

(07-14-2023 12:34 PM)Claw Wrote:  No. The Big 12 cannot offer them the stage the Big East offers. They suffered from losing that stage when in the American, and would be no different in the Big 12.

UCONN's success is tied to the region it is in. It just is. That's not a great region for football. It is what it is.

I think UCONN learned its lesson last time. They stay in the Big East. It's their home.

There's a big difference between playing in the best conference in college hoops (Big XII) and the 7th best conference (AAC).

That's the equivalent of comparing the SEC and Mountain West in football.

It's interesting that people keep saying basketball is irrelevant to realignment. If that were true, we wouldn't be discussing UConn, Memphis, and Gonzaga on this board.