https://www.underdogdynasty.com/2019/9/2...dependents

And both games should be in FCS.

Quote:If the two programs can renew the hatred, more people will watch on TV and fill their stadiums. That’s more visibility for the programs. More money. Better recruits.

Counterpoint: no casual fan in either state is going to care at all about two 2-10 football teams playing each other.

Football at both schools will be dead in a decade whether they play 0 times per year, 2 times per year, or 12 times per year.

(09-04-2019 07:15 AM)ccd494 Wrote:  

Quote:If the two programs can renew the hatred, more people will watch on TV and fill their stadiums. That’s more visibility for the programs. More money. Better recruits.

Counterpoint: no casual fan in either state is going to care at all about two 2-10 football teams playing each other.

Football at both schools will be dead in a decade whether they play 0 times per year, 2 times per year, or 12 times per year.

I tend to agree with this. Both need to build up their programs by playing bigger names, which means when on the road. You don't want to play a road game at UMass if you are UConn, and vice-versa.

They need to play once a year because of geography and rivalry potential. If these two can get to some level of respectable football 6 - 9 wins per year regularly, then it can become "something".

Right now it is basically the "toilet bowl" but it could be a great early November rivalry game when they are playing for bowl eligibility down the road.

I do not see UMass as failing or dead in a decade - as sh!tty as their stadium is, it is affordable and 2 body bag games per year pays for the program. UConn is a little different however, they are hemorrhaging money and need to get that under control. UConn threw all kinds of money at that program and they are no better than Umass who has gone the cheap (er i mean slow and steady) route....

Uconn's move back to the BE for hoops is a good move for hoops, but that isn't saving football....

Revive the Yankee Conference:

Maine
New Hampshire
UMass
UConn
Rhody
Northeastern
Albany
Stony Brook

(09-04-2019 07:15 AM)ccd494 Wrote:  

Quote:If the two programs can renew the hatred, more people will watch on TV and fill their stadiums. That’s more visibility for the programs. More money. Better recruits.

Counterpoint: no casual fan in either state is going to care at all about two 2-10 football teams playing each other.

Football at both schools will be dead in a decade whether they play 0 times per year, 2 times per year, or 12 times per year.

Eh, I know it's fashionable on this forum to assume that UConn football at the FBS level is going to die as an independent, but that really doesn't need to be the case. If it can get 1 or 2 more P5 games per year compared to what it has now and then fill out the rest with an Army-type schedule, then that's sustainable. I know a lot of people here don't want to hear it, but UConn simply looks at all G5 teams as essentially the same (minus maybe a school like Cincinnati) regardless of how a school like UCF or Houston might be in a given year. That might be a lot of arrogance from a team that was 2-10 last year in the AAC, but that's truly how the fan base appears to look at it. Replacing AAC opponents with MAC or Sun Belt opponents won't really matter for UConn as long as they get 1 or 2 more P5 games annually.

I wouldn't necessarily want to see UConn play UMass twice per year for the long term if I was running the UConn athletic department, but it's actually a great suggestion for a temporary scheduling stop gap over the next few years until both schools are able to stabilize their overall schedules.

(09-04-2019 09:35 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(09-04-2019 07:15 AM)ccd494 Wrote:  

Quote:If the two programs can renew the hatred, more people will watch on TV and fill their stadiums. That’s more visibility for the programs. More money. Better recruits.

Counterpoint: no casual fan in either state is going to care at all about two 2-10 football teams playing each other.

Football at both schools will be dead in a decade whether they play 0 times per year, 2 times per year, or 12 times per year.

Eh, I know it's fashionable on this forum to assume that UConn football at the FBS level is going to die as an independent, but that really doesn't need to be the case. If it can get 1 or 2 more P5 games per year compared to what it has now and then fill out the rest with an Army-type schedule, then that's sustainable. I know a lot of people here don't want to hear it, but UConn simply looks at all G5 teams as essentially the same (minus maybe a school like Cincinnati) regardless of how a school like UCF or Houston might be in a given year. That might be a lot of arrogance from a team that was 2-10 last year in the AAC, but that's truly how the fan base appears to look at it. Replacing AAC opponents with MAC or Sun Belt opponents won't really matter for UConn as long as they get 1 or 2 more P5 games annually.

I wouldn't necessarily want to see UConn play UMass twice per year for the long term if I was running the UConn athletic department, but it's actually a great suggestion for a temporary scheduling stop gap over the next few years until both schools are able to stabilize their overall schedules.

I guess it depends what "sustainable" means. Can UConn be an FBS program meeting the bare minimum of requirements? Sure. 15,000-20,000 fans a game, making an occasional drive for 6 wins against a weak schedule, that's doable. Is there much of a point to that?

Playing UMass twice a year isn't a solution to anything. UConn should learn from the Civil ConFLiCT debacle: you can't imagine a rivalry into existence. Rivalries can come from geography, but it takes something more, like a history of closely fought games with stakes on the line. UMass and UConn battling to see who is 2-10 and who is 1-11 isn't going to create that.

(09-04-2019 09:33 AM)westwolf Wrote:  Revive the Yankee Conference:

Maine
New Hampshire
UMass
UConn
Rhody
Northeastern
Albany
Stony Brook

Northeastern and Boston University both dropped football.

Albany & Stony Brook were never in the Yankee Conference, but they'd be a better fit in this conference than the CAA.

I'll do you one better. UConn, UMass, and Liberty should each play each other twice per year. That's four somewhat meaningful late-season games. Someone has to win those games, so create a couple of wins that likely wouldn't otherwise be there.

Throw in an annual game against New Mexico State and occasionally get Army or BYU and you have a clear path to somewhat meaningful schedules.

(09-04-2019 09:52 AM)ccd494 Wrote:  

(09-04-2019 09:35 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(09-04-2019 07:15 AM)ccd494 Wrote:  

Quote:If the two programs can renew the hatred, more people will watch on TV and fill their stadiums. That’s more visibility for the programs. More money. Better recruits.

Counterpoint: no casual fan in either state is going to care at all about two 2-10 football teams playing each other.

Football at both schools will be dead in a decade whether they play 0 times per year, 2 times per year, or 12 times per year.

Eh, I know it's fashionable on this forum to assume that UConn football at the FBS level is going to die as an independent, but that really doesn't need to be the case. If it can get 1 or 2 more P5 games per year compared to what it has now and then fill out the rest with an Army-type schedule, then that's sustainable. I know a lot of people here don't want to hear it, but UConn simply looks at all G5 teams as essentially the same (minus maybe a school like Cincinnati) regardless of how a school like UCF or Houston might be in a given year. That might be a lot of arrogance from a team that was 2-10 last year in the AAC, but that's truly how the fan base appears to look at it. Replacing AAC opponents with MAC or Sun Belt opponents won't really matter for UConn as long as they get 1 or 2 more P5 games annually.

I wouldn't necessarily want to see UConn play UMass twice per year for the long term if I was running the UConn athletic department, but it's actually a great suggestion for a temporary scheduling stop gap over the next few years until both schools are able to stabilize their overall schedules.

I guess it depends what "sustainable" means. Can UConn be an FBS program meeting the bare minimum of requirements? Sure. 15,000-20,000 fans a game, making an occasional drive for 6 wins against a weak schedule, that's doable. Is there much of a point to that?

Playing UMass twice a year isn't a solution to anything. UConn should learn from the Civil ConFLiCT debacle: you can't imagine a rivalry into existence. Rivalries can come from geography, but it takes something more, like a history of closely fought games with stakes on the line. UMass and UConn battling to see who is 2-10 and who is 1-11 isn't going to create that.

UMass and UCONN have a legit history that went on hiatus for 20 years.

Also no, this idea is dumb. UMass doesn't have that much trouble filling the schedule and doesn't need UCONN twice a year to do that.

UConn and UMass are one another's most historic rival. The only reason that this rivalry isn't "heated" is due to it being mostly on hiatus since 1999. With UConn becoming a fellow Indy, this should heat up when both teams improve a bit.

Both schools' alumni can't stand each other, the schools are in close proximity to one another, and tailgating should be a solid mix of students and alumni from both schools again.

I don't want to play UMass twice a year long term (since it would make the game less special annually over time). However, playing them twice a year for like a three year period may stoke the flames of this rivalry again.

Anyway, I feel like these schools are better together than they are apart:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UConn%E2%8...ll_rivalry

3,882 fans showed up for the UMass game. That is hardly a ringing endorsement for such a series.

The three that did the best:
15,705 UCF
12,908 URI
12,194 Cincy

These were also the first three games. Looking back a few years I see a general pattern where Cincy, USF and UCF do pretty well at Rentschler, and so do local FCS schools like Villanova, Maine, Rhode Island and Holy Cross. They also do better with any P5 school (e.g., Missouri). And they do better early in the season (weather seems to be a factor). Army and Navy only seem to draw somewhere between a local FCS school and a regular G5 school ... in short not much difference than Tulane.

That tells me to front load a schedule with home games. Cincy or the Florida teams are decent draws from the American, but that is it. local FCS schools do better than the rest of the AAC. Right now they get one P5 to come, if that ups to 2 or 3 the ticket sales should be better. (Schools like BC, Syracuse, Virginia seem to do better than other P5 ... again regional bias; But I'm sure if they ever got a heavyweight like Wisconsin or Georgia the place would absolutely sell out.)

Frank is right, besides the Florida twins and Cincy you can swap any AAC for any MAC/CUSA school and get the same crowds.

(09-04-2019 12:02 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  3,882 fans showed up for the UMass game. That is hardly a ringing endorsement for such a series.

The three that did the best:
15,705 UCF
12,908 URI
12,194 Cincy

These were also the first three games. Looking back a few years I see a general pattern where Cincy, USF and UCF do pretty well at Rentschler, and so do local FCS schools like Villanova, Maine, Rhode Island and Holy Cross. They also do better with any P5 school (e.g., Missouri). And they do better early in the season (weather seems to be a factor). Army and Navy only seem to draw somewhere between a local FCS school and a regular G5 school ... in short not much difference than Tulane.

That tells me to front load a schedule with home games. Cincy or the Florida teams are decent draws from the American, but that is it. local FCS schools do better than the rest of the AAC. Right now they get one P5 to come, if that ups to 2 or 3 the ticket sales should be better. (Schools like BC, Syracuse, Virginia seem to do better than other P5 ... again regional bias; But I'm sure if they ever got a heavyweight like Wisconsin or Georgia the place would absolutely sell out.)

Frank is right, besides the Florida twins and Cincy you can swap any AAC for any MAC/CUSA school and get the same crowds.

It was between two poorly performing teams that had only played once in the past 20 year and on a ****** weather day. Had it have been a better day people would have gone out despite the teams being bad (because people actually bought tickets and decided to not subject themselves to both bad football and bad weather).

The game in 2012 between the two teams had 35,720 people in attendance. That UCONN team was middling (not terrible), but it was also the second highest attendance that season, behind only Temple.

Don't see a need to play twice a year. Should absolutely play annually, and it's got the potential to turn into something, but twice a year is just unnecessary. UMass puts together a schedule fine, and once you get past 2020 and maybe 2021 UConn should be able to put together an Army/UMass-type schedule as well.

I know this not realistic, but ideally UConn should play all these teams once each year in home and home series.

UMass, Army, BC, Cuse, Rutgers, Temple

Then once every 2 years

Pitt, WV, Cincy, Navy, USF, UCF

(09-04-2019 04:41 PM)goofus Wrote:  I know this not realistic, but ideally UConn should play all these teams once each year in home and home series.

UMass, Army, BC, Cuse, Rutgers, Temple

Then once every 2 years

Pitt, WV, Cincy, Navy, USF, UCF

UConn couldn’t be happier if this were possible but alas.

(09-04-2019 04:41 PM)goofus Wrote:  I know this not realistic, but ideally UConn should play all these teams once each year in home and home series.

UMass, Army, BC, Cuse, Rutgers, Temple

Then once every 2 years

Pitt, WV, Cincy, Navy, USF, UCF

Problem on the opponents end is few OOC games to give and BC-Cuse-RU-Temple would be early season games only.

(09-05-2019 05:19 PM)megadrone Wrote:  

(09-04-2019 04:41 PM)goofus Wrote:  I know this not realistic, but ideally UConn should play all these teams once each year in home and home series.

UMass, Army, BC, Cuse, Rutgers, Temple

Then once every 2 years

Pitt, WV, Cincy, Navy, USF, UCF

Problem on the opponents end is few OOC games to give and BC-Cuse-RU-Temple would be early season games only.

Then I guess instead it's going to be a steady diet every year of

UMass, Army, Liberty, NMSU & BYU

And occasionally they may get a home and home with

BC, Cuse, Temple & Rutgers

(09-04-2019 07:15 AM)ccd494 Wrote:  

Quote:If the two programs can renew the hatred, more people will watch on TV and fill their stadiums. That’s more visibility for the programs. More money. Better recruits.

Counterpoint: no casual fan in either state is going to care at all about two 2-10 football teams playing each other.

Football at both schools will be dead in a decade whether they play 0 times per year, 2 times per year, or 12 times per year.

Counter-counterpoint: if they played 12 times a year they couldn’t both be 2-10.
:aha: