(02-26-2019 07:56 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(02-26-2019 07:05 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-26-2019 06:59 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  This is a little harsh....

“The Huskies failed to land in a major conference during realignment earlier this decade, leaving them in the second-rate American Athletic Conference.”

Difficult to take this Alex Putterman serious when in one breath he ridicules UCONN’s football performance the last decade then in the next breath criticizes their conference calling it “second-rate”.

UCONN is still a relatively young football program. Given the right coach it will improve.

The AAC is a "second-rate" conference. If you aren't in the A5, you are second rate.

That's the truth.

I understand what you are saying but let’s be real. Only 6 to 8 programs have a chance to win the national title each season and they are usually “chosen” before the season begins. The college football championship, while improved with the CFP, is still a farce.

PS... can’t see that coffee drinking emoji and not think of Wilkie

I thought the same thing Jim!!

(02-26-2019 05:27 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(02-26-2019 05:09 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  Right, back at Penn State, Beaver Stadium stood/stands vacant all days except when football is played or practiced there. It's BJC that gets the action. BJC brings in revenue.

My "beef" with the football venue thing isn't that schools play football, but how major conferences really stressed the value of the OCS. Folks, the OCS is a money-losing venture no matter how great the program. It's simply infuriating that when schools looked to ink deals with other venues to host, and how "unpopular" the options are within the schools. I'll never understand how something that actually saves money, real money, is discouraged. It really must be a higher ed thing...because it's not always their money they're spending.

A lot of the outdoor facilities game is based on fads not revenue.

When I was a kid. The rich programs had artificial surfaces in football and grass in baseball. The poor programs had real grass in football and it wasn't unusual that they'd have an artificial surface in baseball because the baseball field was multi-use or multi-tenant or both.

Now most P5's have grass football fields and artificial surfaces in baseball.

Arenas you go in planning to at a bare minimum host multiple events like basketball and volleyball (maybe even track) and try to draw in some concerts and maybe host graduation and big lectures and concerts.

AState and the city of Jonesboro have talked about doing a joint off-campus venue for baseball and maybe softball (if we add it, as expected) because it doesn't make any sense to build new baseball and softball stadiums that are empty except for March and April and parts of February and May.

Until more recently, the massive venue projects, like new builds or major renovations were the smoke of impending conference affiliation changes. As if there was a behind-closed-door discussion with those potentially holding the notes that the investment was good because it was part of numerous athletic changes.

Now, it’s about potential and preparation. Not already being ready magically disqualifies you from the chase. Or could it be the intel was so wrong when selling it to stakeholders?

The diminishing return thing is also very much at play with these venues. Line up some early events and suggest the programming infrastructure is present and sustainable. That is clearly not present now/anymore with UConn. I’d be wary of any stadium project that didn’t have at least five years of consistent/steady programming with the proposal. Like, put your sports there, sure, but commit it for campus events, classes, or other functions if it isn’t also attracting outside money. Again, with UConn, it doesn’t look like the stadium is doubling as a classroom when it isn’t hosting Huskies football.

(01-19-2019 02:38 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(01-19-2019 11:18 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-19-2019 11:11 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  And the Big East divorce money just ended IIRC

Yep. UConn is pinning all its hopes on Aresco's consummate negotiating skills.

Problem is, even if Aresco does cut a good media deal, chances are it won't be that much more than what UConn was getting from the Big East divorce money, which still resulted in these massive deficits.

What they are really counting on is an ACC or Big Ten invitation if the Big 12 implodes.

Alternatively, they are hoping to merge with the remnants of the Big 12 and receive more TV dollars that way.

There is no real UConn plan other than to hope for the best and get a P5 spot.

Hope is not a strategy, however

(02-26-2019 03:45 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-14-2019 02:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-14-2019 02:07 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  You have a point. That said---I actually think the AAC has some solid peer institutions for UConn. For instance---all are FBS. All but one are top 200 USNWR universities. Most are high research universities per Carnegie.

Here's a link to a document from a UConn website (Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness) that lists UConn's "peers and aspirants":

Peers:

Indiana
Michigan State
Purdue
Delaware
Georgia
Kansas
Kentucky
Utah

Aspirants:

Ohio State
Penn State
UC - Davis
Florida
Illinois
Maryland
Texas
Wisconsin


What stands out to me is that (a) all the schools are public schools, (b) just about all are flagships, © a full 8 of the 16 schools on the combined lists are from the B1G. None are from the ACC or AAC/Big East. Three are from the SEC, two from the Big 12.

The rubber: Seems like UConn sees itself and wants to see itself as an elite public flagship, and that's who it wants to affiliate with. That says B1G more than anything else. Doesn't say AAC at all, or Big East.

https://oire.uconn.edu/wp-content/upload...irants.pdf

I couldn't tell from the link when these lists were compiled. In September 2012 results of a national survey was published in which UConn listed 20 peers (without distinguishing between those it considered actual peers and those it aspired to be considered peers with). All the schools you list as aspirants were included on that list of 20. Of peers, only Purdue and Georgia were on the 2012 list. Four ACC schools ( Georgia Tech, Maryland, UNC and Virginia) were on the list then, and only Maryland, which left the ACC for the B1G shortly afterwards, is on both lists.

Significantly, none of the 20 schools UConn listed as peers reported that they also considered UConn as one of their peers. These are the schools that listed UConn as peers:

Arizona State
Binghamton U.
Bowdoin
BYU
Florida State
George Mason
Iowa State
Miami (O)
North Dakota State
Ohio U.
Rochester Institute of Technology
Rutgers
SUNY Albany
Sacred Heart
St John's
Texas Tech
UMass
New Hampshire
University of Phoenix, Jersey City
Rhode island
UT-Dallas
Vermont
West Virginia

While one should always take lists like this with a grain of salt, these suggest a certain lack of self-awareness by UConn. It's one thing to aspire for self-improvement. But it's hard to avoid using the word "wannabe" when you see something like this.

UConn as an academic school is significantly higher ranked than the schools you listed (NC State as well) Other than RIT which is a very highly ranked engineering school

(03-05-2019 11:46 AM)Huskies12 Wrote:  

(02-26-2019 03:45 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-14-2019 02:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-14-2019 02:07 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  You have a point. That said---I actually think the AAC has some solid peer institutions for UConn. For instance---all are FBS. All but one are top 200 USNWR universities. Most are high research universities per Carnegie.

Here's a link to a document from a UConn website (Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness) that lists UConn's "peers and aspirants":

Peers:

Indiana
Michigan State
Purdue
Delaware
Georgia
Kansas
Kentucky
Utah

Aspirants:

Ohio State
Penn State
UC - Davis
Florida
Illinois
Maryland
Texas
Wisconsin


What stands out to me is that (a) all the schools are public schools, (b) just about all are flagships, © a full 8 of the 16 schools on the combined lists are from the B1G. None are from the ACC or AAC/Big East. Three are from the SEC, two from the Big 12.

The rubber: Seems like UConn sees itself and wants to see itself as an elite public flagship, and that's who it wants to affiliate with. That says B1G more than anything else. Doesn't say AAC at all, or Big East.

https://oire.uconn.edu/wp-content/upload...irants.pdf

I couldn't tell from the link when these lists were compiled. In September 2012 results of a national survey was published in which UConn listed 20 peers (without distinguishing between those it considered actual peers and those it aspired to be considered peers with). All the schools you list as aspirants were included on that list of 20. Of peers, only Purdue and Georgia were on the 2012 list. Four ACC schools ( Georgia Tech, Maryland, UNC and Virginia) were on the list then, and only Maryland, which left the ACC for the B1G shortly afterwards, is on both lists.

Significantly, none of the 20 schools UConn listed as peers reported that they also considered UConn as one of their peers. These are the schools that listed UConn as peers:

Arizona State
Binghamton U.
Bowdoin
BYU
Florida State
George Mason
Iowa State
Miami (O)
North Dakota State
Ohio U.
Rochester Institute of Technology
Rutgers
SUNY Albany
Sacred Heart
St John's
Texas Tech
UMass
New Hampshire
University of Phoenix, Jersey City
Rhode island
UT-Dallas
Vermont
West Virginia

While one should always take lists like this with a grain of salt, these suggest a certain lack of self-awareness by UConn. It's one thing to aspire for self-improvement. But it's hard to avoid using the word "wannabe" when you see something like this.

UConn as an academic school is significantly higher ranked than the schools you listed (NC State as well) Other than RIT which is a very highly ranked engineering school

Academic rankings (like USNWR) may be one factor in identifying peers (either actual peers or aspirational peers). I don't know that it's the most important factor. Other things, like admissions philosophy, curriculum, institutional mission, and geographical considerations (urban vs rural, population, student body size, etc.) are probably more important. I'm not sure why you mentioned NC State, since they aren't on any peer lists involving UConn, other than both were started as primarily agricultural schools many years ago. Is that why you mentioned them?

Some interesting data from the EADA reports filed for the most recent fiscal year (9/18) for UConn and Houston. As becomes obvious from these numbers is that there are different reporting philosophies at work. There's some serious books cooking going on. But a few things still stand out. Consider these numbers (in $millions).

............................Conn......Houston
Revenues:
Football...................19.0........14.2
Men's BB...................8.5..........5.3
Women's BB..............7.4..........2.2
Men's other..............10.0.........4.5
Women's other..........13.8.........6.2
Not allocated............20.3........22.9
Total......................79.0.......55.3

Expenses:
Football....................15.1........14.2
Men's BB....................8.4..........5.3
Women's BB...............7.4..........2.2
Men's other................10.0.........4.5
Women's other............13.7........6.2
Not allocated..............23.8......22.9
Total.......................78.4.......55.3

Coaches' salaries:
Men...........................8.7..........6.8
Women......................5.6..........1.8
Total.......................14.3.........8.6

Gameday expenses:
Football......................4.2..........2.9
Basketball...................4.7..........1.6
Other..........................5.5..........2.3
Total:........................14.4........6.8

When Houston reports revenues and expenses being exactly equal for all categories, it isn't clear whether the revenues are artificially made to equal the actual expenses or vice versa. Nevertheless, a few things stand out to me.

Other sports besides football or basketball play a big difference between these two schools. One obvious difference is the impact of hockey, which both men and women play at UConn. Hockey, especially facilities rental, is an expensive sport, and it is regionally perhaps more important to UConn than football.

One can probably also surmise from these numbers that UConn has higher facilities costs than Houston accross the board. This is at least partly a result of contractual requirements between UConn and the State of Connecticut.

Neither school (for that matter no EADA reporting school) identifies institutional subsidies in its revenue reporting, nor identifies how those subsidies are allocated to specific sports.

(03-05-2019 02:00 PM)ken d Wrote:  Some interesting data from the EADA reports filed for the most recent fiscal year (9/18) for UConn and Houston. As becomes obvious from these numbers is that there are different reporting philosophies at work. There's some serious books cooking going on. But a few things still stand out. Consider these numbers (in $millions).

............................Conn......Houston
Revenues:
Football...................19.0........14.2
Men's BB...................8.5..........5.3
Women's BB..............7.4..........2.2
Men's other..............10.0.........4.5
Women's other..........13.8.........6.2
Not allocated............20.3........22.9
Total......................79.0.......55.3

Expenses:
Football....................15.1........14.2
Men's BB....................8.4..........5.3
Women's BB...............7.4..........2.2
Men's other................10.0.........4.5
Women's other............13.7........6.2
Not allocated..............23.8......22.9
Total.......................78.4.......55.3

Coaches' salaries:
Men...........................8.7..........6.8
Women......................5.6..........1.8
Total.......................14.3.........8.6

Gameday expenses:
Football......................4.2..........2.9
Basketball...................4.7..........1.6
Other..........................5.5..........2.3
Total:........................14.4........6.8

When Houston reports revenues and expenses being exactly equal for all categories, it isn't clear whether the revenues are artificially made to equal the actual expenses or vice versa. Nevertheless, a few things stand out to me.

Other sports besides football or basketball play a big difference between these two schools. One obvious difference is the impact of hockey, which both men and women play at UConn. Hockey, especially facilities rental, is an expensive sport, and it is regionally perhaps more important to UConn than football.

One can probably also surmise from these numbers that UConn has higher facilities costs than Houston accross the board. This is at least partly a result of contractual requirements between UConn and the State of Connecticut.

Neither school (for that matter no EADA reporting school) identifies institutional subsidies in its revenue reporting, nor identifies how those subsidies are allocated to specific sports.

I said a while back that I was curious if hockey was a major reason UConn has so much higher expenses than other G5's (especially southern G5 schools).

(03-05-2019 02:00 PM)ken d Wrote:  Some interesting data from the EADA reports filed for the most recent fiscal year (9/18) for UConn and Houston. As becomes obvious from these numbers is that there are different reporting philosophies at work. There's some serious books cooking going on. But a few things still stand out. Consider these numbers (in $millions).

............................Conn......Houston
Revenues:
Football...................19.0........14.2
Men's BB...................8.5..........5.3
Women's BB..............7.4..........2.2
Men's other..............10.0.........4.5
Women's other..........13.8.........6.2
Not allocated............20.3........22.9
Total......................79.0.......55.3

Expenses:
Football....................15.1........14.2
Men's BB....................8.4..........5.3
Women's BB...............7.4..........2.2
Men's other................10.0.........4.5
Women's other............13.7........6.2
Not allocated..............23.8......22.9
Total.......................78.4.......55.3

Coaches' salaries:
Men...........................8.7..........6.8
Women......................5.6..........1.8
Total.......................14.3.........8.6

Gameday expenses:
Football......................4.2..........2.9
Basketball...................4.7..........1.6
Other..........................5.5..........2.3
Total:........................14.4........6.8

When Houston reports revenues and expenses being exactly equal for all categories, it isn't clear whether the revenues are artificially made to equal the actual expenses or vice versa. Nevertheless, a few things stand out to me.

Other sports besides football or basketball play a big difference between these two schools. One obvious difference is the impact of hockey, which both men and women play at UConn. Hockey, especially facilities rental, is an expensive sport, and it is regionally perhaps more important to UConn than football.

One can probably also surmise from these numbers that UConn has higher facilities costs than Houston accross the board. This is at least partly a result of contractual requirements between UConn and the State of Connecticut.

Neither school (for that matter no EADA reporting school) identifies institutional subsidies in its revenue reporting, nor identifies how those subsidies are allocated to specific sports.

UConn does not own Rentschler Field (Football) or the XL Center (Men's Basketball/Hockey). Additionally, it does not get to keep parking or concessions from either venue when hosting, if I understand their set-up correctly. Both would incur significant expenses annually, and if the program struggles with attendance, then the deficit only grows exponentially.

Oddly enough, UConn is in the process of building a new hockey arena (which will only seat 2.5k) at $45 million, but still play a majority of its games at XL Center (which it rents). If you are going to build a new facility, why not build it so most of your games can be played there?

(03-05-2019 11:46 AM)Huskies12 Wrote:  

(02-26-2019 03:45 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-14-2019 02:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-14-2019 02:07 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  You have a point. That said---I actually think the AAC has some solid peer institutions for UConn. For instance---all are FBS. All but one are top 200 USNWR universities. Most are high research universities per Carnegie.

Here's a link to a document from a UConn website (Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness) that lists UConn's "peers and aspirants":

Peers:

Indiana
Michigan State
Purdue
Delaware
Georgia
Kansas
Kentucky
Utah

Aspirants:

Ohio State
Penn State
UC - Davis
Florida
Illinois
Maryland
Texas
Wisconsin


What stands out to me is that (a) all the schools are public schools, (b) just about all are flagships, © a full 8 of the 16 schools on the combined lists are from the B1G. None are from the ACC or AAC/Big East. Three are from the SEC, two from the Big 12.

The rubber: Seems like UConn sees itself and wants to see itself as an elite public flagship, and that's who it wants to affiliate with. That says B1G more than anything else. Doesn't say AAC at all, or Big East.

https://oire.uconn.edu/wp-content/upload...irants.pdf

I couldn't tell from the link when these lists were compiled. In September 2012 results of a national survey was published in which UConn listed 20 peers (without distinguishing between those it considered actual peers and those it aspired to be considered peers with). All the schools you list as aspirants were included on that list of 20. Of peers, only Purdue and Georgia were on the 2012 list. Four ACC schools ( Georgia Tech, Maryland, UNC and Virginia) were on the list then, and only Maryland, which left the ACC for the B1G shortly afterwards, is on both lists.

Significantly, none of the 20 schools UConn listed as peers reported that they also considered UConn as one of their peers. These are the schools that listed UConn as peers:

Arizona State
Binghamton U.
Bowdoin
BYU
Florida State
George Mason
Iowa State
Miami (O)
North Dakota State
Ohio U.
Rochester Institute of Technology
Rutgers
SUNY Albany
Sacred Heart
St John's
Texas Tech
UMass
New Hampshire
University of Phoenix, Jersey City
Rhode island
UT-Dallas
Vermont
West Virginia

While one should always take lists like this with a grain of salt, these suggest a certain lack of self-awareness by UConn. It's one thing to aspire for self-improvement. But it's hard to avoid using the word "wannabe" when you see something like this.

UConn as an academic school is significantly higher ranked than the schools you listed (NC State as well) Other than RIT which is a very highly ranked engineering school

What's your definition of significant? UCONN is rated as the #63 national university (#22 Public) by US News and UMass is #70 (#26 Public).

(03-05-2019 02:16 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(03-05-2019 02:00 PM)ken d Wrote:  Some interesting data from the EADA reports filed for the most recent fiscal year (9/18) for UConn and Houston. As becomes obvious from these numbers is that there are different reporting philosophies at work. There's some serious books cooking going on. But a few things still stand out. Consider these numbers (in $millions).

............................Conn......Houston
Revenues:
Football...................19.0........14.2
Men's BB...................8.5..........5.3
Women's BB..............7.4..........2.2
Men's other..............10.0.........4.5
Women's other..........13.8.........6.2
Not allocated............20.3........22.9
Total......................79.0.......55.3

Expenses:
Football....................15.1........14.2
Men's BB....................8.4..........5.3
Women's BB...............7.4..........2.2
Men's other................10.0.........4.5
Women's other............13.7........6.2
Not allocated..............23.8......22.9
Total.......................78.4.......55.3

Coaches' salaries:
Men...........................8.7..........6.8
Women......................5.6..........1.8
Total.......................14.3.........8.6

Gameday expenses:
Football......................4.2..........2.9
Basketball...................4.7..........1.6
Other..........................5.5..........2.3
Total:........................14.4........6.8

When Houston reports revenues and expenses being exactly equal for all categories, it isn't clear whether the revenues are artificially made to equal the actual expenses or vice versa. Nevertheless, a few things stand out to me.

Other sports besides football or basketball play a big difference between these two schools. One obvious difference is the impact of hockey, which both men and women play at UConn. Hockey, especially facilities rental, is an expensive sport, and it is regionally perhaps more important to UConn than football.

One can probably also surmise from these numbers that UConn has higher facilities costs than Houston accross the board. This is at least partly a result of contractual requirements between UConn and the State of Connecticut.

Neither school (for that matter no EADA reporting school) identifies institutional subsidies in its revenue reporting, nor identifies how those subsidies are allocated to specific sports.

UConn does not own Rentschler Field (Football) or the XL Center (Men's Basketball/Hockey). Additionally, it does not get to keep parking or concessions from either venue when hosting, if I understand their set-up correctly. Both would incur significant expenses annually, and if the program struggles with attendance, then the deficit only grows exponentially.

Oddly enough, UConn is in the process of building a new hockey arena (which will only seat 2.5k) at $45 million, but still play a majority of its games at XL Center (which it rents). If you are going to build a new facility, why not build it so most of your games can be played there?

Because the XL Center needs them to play as many games as possible. The alternative is an underutilized government owned building that doesn't attract many other lucrative bookings. So, to an extent, while UConn is being subsidized by Connecticut taxpayers, the Huskies are in return also subsidizing the government/taxpayers.

Is there any other program that rents an off campus stadium far from campus and splits its basketball games between on campus and an arena 27 miles away? The closest thing I could think of is when UMass moved up to FBS and played in the Patriots stadium in Foxboro while they fixed their on campus stadium in Amherst but even that was a temporary move. Miami might be another example but at least they play basketball on campus. But UConn might be unique in that regard.

Edit: UCLA and UNLV play football far from campus but like Miami, they play basketball on campus. UNLV football will be closer to campus once they start playing in the new Raiders stadium.

(03-05-2019 03:04 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  Is there any other program that rents an off campus stadium far from campus and splits its basketball games between on campus and an arena 27 miles away? The closest thing I could think of is when UMass moved up to FBS and played in the Patriots stadium in Foxboro while they fixed their on campus stadium in Amherst but even that was a temporary move. Miami might be another example but at least they play basketball on campus. But UConn might be unique in that regard.

I don't think it was a coincidence that UConn started to play at the XL Center right after the NFL's Hartford Whalers franchise relocated to North Carolina.

According to MMT, debt is nothing but a construct. UCONN needs to spend MORE. That will make them attractive enough to the Big12, ACC and hopefully the coveted B1G. Too much winning NOT to go for it...

(03-05-2019 03:04 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  Is there any other program that rents an off campus stadium far from campus and splits its basketball games between on campus and an arena 27 miles away? The closest thing I could think of is when UMass moved up to FBS and played in the Patriots stadium in Foxboro while they fixed their on campus stadium in Amherst but even that was a temporary move. Miami might be another example but at least they play basketball on campus. But UConn might be unique in that regard.

Edit: UCLA and UNLV play football far from campus but like Miami, they play basketball on campus. UNLV football will be closer to campus once they start playing in the new Raiders stadium.

Georgetown usually plays at least one basketball game on campus but nothing like that sort of distance.

Long ago, Arkansas-Little Rock would play some in Pine Bluff Convention Center (49 miles from campus) when there was a schedule conflict with the Statehouse Convention Center.

(03-05-2019 02:00 PM)ken d Wrote:  Some interesting data from the EADA reports filed for the most recent fiscal year (9/18) for UConn and Houston. As becomes obvious from these numbers is that there are different reporting philosophies at work. There's some serious books cooking going on. But a few things still stand out. Consider these numbers (in $millions).

............................Conn......Houston
Revenues:
Football...................19.0........14.2
Men's BB...................8.5..........5.3
Women's BB..............7.4..........2.2
Men's other..............10.0.........4.5
Women's other..........13.8.........6.2
Not allocated............20.3........22.9
Total......................79.0.......55.3

Expenses:
Football....................15.1........14.2
Men's BB....................8.4..........5.3
Women's BB...............7.4..........2.2
Men's other................10.0.........4.5
Women's other............13.7........6.2
Not allocated..............23.8......22.9
Total.......................78.4.......55.3

Coaches' salaries:
Men...........................8.7..........6.8
Women......................5.6..........1.8
Total.......................14.3.........8.6

Gameday expenses:
Football......................4.2..........2.9
Basketball...................4.7..........1.6
Other..........................5.5..........2.3
Total:........................14.4........6.8

When Houston reports revenues and expenses being exactly equal for all categories, it isn't clear whether the revenues are artificially made to equal the actual expenses or vice versa. Nevertheless, a few things stand out to me.

Other sports besides football or basketball play a big difference between these two schools. One obvious difference is the impact of hockey, which both men and women play at UConn. Hockey, especially facilities rental, is an expensive sport, and it is regionally perhaps more important to UConn than football.

But ... your post doesn't tell us what UConn spends on hockey.

(03-05-2019 02:22 PM)e-parade Wrote:  

(03-05-2019 11:46 AM)Huskies12 Wrote:  

(02-26-2019 03:45 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-14-2019 02:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-14-2019 02:07 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  You have a point. That said---I actually think the AAC has some solid peer institutions for UConn. For instance---all are FBS. All but one are top 200 USNWR universities. Most are high research universities per Carnegie.

Here's a link to a document from a UConn website (Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness) that lists UConn's "peers and aspirants":

Peers:

Indiana
Michigan State
Purdue
Delaware
Georgia
Kansas
Kentucky
Utah

Aspirants:

Ohio State
Penn State
UC - Davis
Florida
Illinois
Maryland
Texas
Wisconsin


What stands out to me is that (a) all the schools are public schools, (b) just about all are flagships, © a full 8 of the 16 schools on the combined lists are from the B1G. None are from the ACC or AAC/Big East. Three are from the SEC, two from the Big 12.

The rubber: Seems like UConn sees itself and wants to see itself as an elite public flagship, and that's who it wants to affiliate with. That says B1G more than anything else. Doesn't say AAC at all, or Big East.

https://oire.uconn.edu/wp-content/upload...irants.pdf

I couldn't tell from the link when these lists were compiled. In September 2012 results of a national survey was published in which UConn listed 20 peers (without distinguishing between those it considered actual peers and those it aspired to be considered peers with). All the schools you list as aspirants were included on that list of 20. Of peers, only Purdue and Georgia were on the 2012 list. Four ACC schools ( Georgia Tech, Maryland, UNC and Virginia) were on the list then, and only Maryland, which left the ACC for the B1G shortly afterwards, is on both lists.

Significantly, none of the 20 schools UConn listed as peers reported that they also considered UConn as one of their peers. These are the schools that listed UConn as peers:

Arizona State
Binghamton U.
Bowdoin
BYU
Florida State
George Mason
Iowa State
Miami (O)
North Dakota State
Ohio U.
Rochester Institute of Technology
Rutgers
SUNY Albany
Sacred Heart
St John's
Texas Tech
UMass
New Hampshire
University of Phoenix, Jersey City
Rhode island
UT-Dallas
Vermont
West Virginia

While one should always take lists like this with a grain of salt, these suggest a certain lack of self-awareness by UConn. It's one thing to aspire for self-improvement. But it's hard to avoid using the word "wannabe" when you see something like this.

UConn as an academic school is significantly higher ranked than the schools you listed (NC State as well) Other than RIT which is a very highly ranked engineering school

What's your definition of significant? UCONN is rated as the #63 national university (#22 Public) by US News and UMass is #70 (#26 Public).

I guess 7 then. Unless you enjoy UMass Amherst being recognized with the University of Phoenix Jersey City.

(03-05-2019 11:46 AM)Huskies12 Wrote:  

(02-26-2019 03:45 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-14-2019 02:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-14-2019 02:07 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  You have a point. That said---I actually think the AAC has some solid peer institutions for UConn. For instance---all are FBS. All but one are top 200 USNWR universities. Most are high research universities per Carnegie.

Here's a link to a document from a UConn website (Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness) that lists UConn's "peers and aspirants":

Peers:

Indiana
Michigan State
Purdue
Delaware
Georgia
Kansas
Kentucky
Utah

Aspirants:

Ohio State
Penn State
UC - Davis
Florida
Illinois
Maryland
Texas
Wisconsin


What stands out to me is that (a) all the schools are public schools, (b) just about all are flagships, © a full 8 of the 16 schools on the combined lists are from the B1G. None are from the ACC or AAC/Big East. Three are from the SEC, two from the Big 12.

The rubber: Seems like UConn sees itself and wants to see itself as an elite public flagship, and that's who it wants to affiliate with. That says B1G more than anything else. Doesn't say AAC at all, or Big East.

https://oire.uconn.edu/wp-content/upload...irants.pdf

I couldn't tell from the link when these lists were compiled. In September 2012 results of a national survey was published in which UConn listed 20 peers (without distinguishing between those it considered actual peers and those it aspired to be considered peers with). All the schools you list as aspirants were included on that list of 20. Of peers, only Purdue and Georgia were on the 2012 list. Four ACC schools ( Georgia Tech, Maryland, UNC and Virginia) were on the list then, and only Maryland, which left the ACC for the B1G shortly afterwards, is on both lists.

Significantly, none of the 20 schools UConn listed as peers reported that they also considered UConn as one of their peers. These are the schools that listed UConn as peers:

Arizona State
Binghamton U.
Bowdoin
BYU
Florida State
George Mason
Iowa State
Miami (O)
North Dakota State
Ohio U.
Rochester Institute of Technology
Rutgers
SUNY Albany
Sacred Heart
St John's
Texas Tech
UMass
New Hampshire
University of Phoenix, Jersey City
Rhode island
UT-Dallas
Vermont
West Virginia

While one should always take lists like this with a grain of salt, these suggest a certain lack of self-awareness by UConn. It's one thing to aspire for self-improvement. But it's hard to avoid using the word "wannabe" when you see something like this.

UConn as an academic school is significantly higher ranked than the schools you listed (NC State as well) Other than RIT which is a very highly ranked engineering school

Bowdoin is a really, really weird outlier here.

(03-05-2019 12:22 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-05-2019 11:46 AM)Huskies12 Wrote:  

(02-26-2019 03:45 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-14-2019 02:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-14-2019 02:07 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  You have a point. That said---I actually think the AAC has some solid peer institutions for UConn. For instance---all are FBS. All but one are top 200 USNWR universities. Most are high research universities per Carnegie.

Here's a link to a document from a UConn website (Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness) that lists UConn's "peers and aspirants":

Peers:

Indiana
Michigan State
Purdue
Delaware
Georgia
Kansas
Kentucky
Utah

Aspirants:

Ohio State
Penn State
UC - Davis
Florida
Illinois
Maryland
Texas
Wisconsin


What stands out to me is that (a) all the schools are public schools, (b) just about all are flagships, © a full 8 of the 16 schools on the combined lists are from the B1G. None are from the ACC or AAC/Big East. Three are from the SEC, two from the Big 12.

The rubber: Seems like UConn sees itself and wants to see itself as an elite public flagship, and that's who it wants to affiliate with. That says B1G more than anything else. Doesn't say AAC at all, or Big East.

https://oire.uconn.edu/wp-content/upload...irants.pdf

I couldn't tell from the link when these lists were compiled. In September 2012 results of a national survey was published in which UConn listed 20 peers (without distinguishing between those it considered actual peers and those it aspired to be considered peers with). All the schools you list as aspirants were included on that list of 20. Of peers, only Purdue and Georgia were on the 2012 list. Four ACC schools ( Georgia Tech, Maryland, UNC and Virginia) were on the list then, and only Maryland, which left the ACC for the B1G shortly afterwards, is on both lists.

Significantly, none of the 20 schools UConn listed as peers reported that they also considered UConn as one of their peers. These are the schools that listed UConn as peers:

Arizona State
Binghamton U.
Bowdoin
BYU
Florida State
George Mason
Iowa State
Miami (O)
North Dakota State
Ohio U.
Rochester Institute of Technology
Rutgers
SUNY Albany
Sacred Heart
St John's
Texas Tech
UMass
New Hampshire
University of Phoenix, Jersey City
Rhode island
UT-Dallas
Vermont
West Virginia

While one should always take lists like this with a grain of salt, these suggest a certain lack of self-awareness by UConn. It's one thing to aspire for self-improvement. But it's hard to avoid using the word "wannabe" when you see something like this.

UConn as an academic school is significantly higher ranked than the schools you listed (NC State as well) Other than RIT which is a very highly ranked engineering school

Academic rankings (like USNWR) may be one factor in identifying peers (either actual peers or aspirational peers). I don't know that it's the most important factor. Other things, like admissions philosophy, curriculum, institutional mission, and geographical considerations (urban vs rural, population, student body size, etc.) are probably more important. I'm not sure why you mentioned NC State, since they aren't on any peer lists involving UConn, other than both were started as primarily agricultural schools many years ago. Is that why you mentioned them?

Ehh I just know you're an NC State guy, so if you want to rip UConn I can rip NC Juco

Crazy how life works, one minute we are a top national basketball power and one of the fasted growing football programs in the country, a few years later we are 40 mil in debt and basically have been rejected by the p5...
Dont get me wrong...imma rep my huskies even if we are in the nec. regardless, it still hurts to see how far we have fallen, whether that be our national perception or actual performance levels.

(03-06-2019 04:08 PM)Huskypride Wrote:  Crazy how life works, one minute we are a top national basketball power and one of the fasted growing football programs in the country, a few years later we are 40 mil in debt and basically have been rejected by the p5...
Dont get me wrong...imma rep my huskies even if we are in the nec. regardless, it still hurts to see how far we have fallen, whether that be our national perception or actual performance levels.

UConn's big mistake was not moving football up in 1991 when they had the chance.

They were just too new when realignment happened.