(10-30-2023 10:43 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  I'm not buying that it was the BE that improved UConn's program.

Yeah, UConn caught lightning in a bottle last season, but it was a year for the little guys. It's not like they were battling Duke, Kentucky and Kansas in the final 4. Miami plays in a major league but were always the doormat. FAU came from nowhere and who would ever expect to make it to the NCAA finals and get to play SDSU???

UConn just plain couldn't cut it in the AAC. If UC wasn't kicking their a$$, Houston was.

*UConn gets placed in a regional with Kansas and UCLA as the 1/2 seeds*

"It was a year for the little guys!"

(10-30-2023 11:49 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  UConn men's hoops underachieved in the AAC for multiple reasons. To limit the reason to one factor (bad coaches, bad AAC teams, fans didn't care, etc.) is too simplistic a take.

In theory, UConn with a legit coach (and Hurley has emerged as such) should be able to win in whatever league it is a member due to its tremendous history and resources.

I sometimes wonder if some posters distort the negative impact of the AAC on UConn (and, yes, membership in that league was, indeed, detrimental to UConn hoops) so as take the opportunity to denigrate the AAC. Conversely, there are some anti-UConn types on this board who seemingly are sometimes unwilling to fully note some of the problems AAC membership caused UConn.

They recruited better than anyone else in the AAC and still finished in the back half of the conference.

I also wish UCONN would get an ACC invite. The lawsuit burnt that bridge.

I made this counter-example a few years ago, but consider this: what if UCLA was left behind with other PAC schools leaving for greener pastures? Either through a called-up MWC in the PAC, or placement in the MWC, UCLA goes from playing USC, Arizona, Washington, Oregon, California, etc. (with its program history) to San Diego State, San Jose State, Wyoming, Boise State, etc. UCLA, like UConn, is a blue blood. It *shouldn't* experience a downgrade with on-court performance or fan support. But what happens the first time they lose to a Fresno State? Or a Utah State? There would be a few, not majority, of fans that would stop going to games, because of the drop-off in opponents. What happens that first year that they don't make the NCAAT? Those pockets of fans that stop coming start to grow. Then ratings aren't as strong. Perhaps it becomes more challenging to recruit.

Within relegation, it is very, very easy for one bad season to turn into a bad stretch of years into a bad era - until finally that program is stuck where it is. The team that drops down is expected to win every game (and conference), and, inevitably, when that team loses or doesn't win that conference, the reputation and perception suffers. It has been beaten to death like a dead horse around here, but UConn is so institutionally unique that no other program can really compare with it (in terms of athletic department history, conference affiliation, program success, etc.). However, UConn is like any other program in the country where if it is dropped down, the auxiliary metrics would undoubtedly decline with it. Some are very quick to defend a conference against causing that, but the effects are very real.

(10-30-2023 11:49 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  UConn men's hoops underachieved in the AAC for multiple reasons. To limit the reason to one factor (bad coaches, bad AAC teams, fans didn't care, etc.) is too simplistic a take.

In theory, UConn with a legit coach (and Hurley has emerged as such) should be able to win in whatever league it is a member due to its tremendous history and resources.

I sometimes wonder if some posters distort the negative impact of the AAC on UConn (and, yes, membership in that league was, indeed, detrimental to UConn hoops) so as take the opportunity to denigrate the AAC. Conversely, there are some anti-UConn types on this board who seemingly are sometimes unwilling to fully note some of the problems AAC membership caused UConn.

This is pretty spot on. It was a confluence of factors. Ollie did a great job his first 2 years and for people who dismiss his initial success as just coaching Calhoun's guys, Ollie was on the staff under Calhoun from 2010 until he took over in 2012. He was a part of the 2011 championship as an assistant coach and won another in 2014 as head coach. He went through off the court issues with his marriage and although he recruited well at UConn, many of his highest rated players just didn't pan out due to injuries and other issues. He won at least 20 games in his first four seasons. Then the wheels fell off.

The AAC was a competitive league and UConn was not able to dominate it. That was a double edged sword because that caused the fanbase to get restless and indifferent. Losing to schools that most of our fans never heard of like Tulsa was like an indignity. It was kind of like trap game after trap game. UConn's fans and player weren't excited for most of them but they got all of their opponents best efforts. Everyone wanted to beat and humiliate arrogant UConn in the AAC and I don't blame them. I get that 100%.

(10-30-2023 03:08 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 11:49 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  UConn men's hoops underachieved in the AAC for multiple reasons. To limit the reason to one factor (bad coaches, bad AAC teams, fans didn't care, etc.) is too simplistic a take.

In theory, UConn with a legit coach (and Hurley has emerged as such) should be able to win in whatever league it is a member due to its tremendous history and resources.

I sometimes wonder if some posters distort the negative impact of the AAC on UConn (and, yes, membership in that league was, indeed, detrimental to UConn hoops) so as take the opportunity to denigrate the AAC. Conversely, there are some anti-UConn types on this board who seemingly are sometimes unwilling to fully note some of the problems AAC membership caused UConn.

This is pretty spot on. It was a confluence of factors. Ollie did a great job his first 2 years and for people who dismiss his initial success as just coaching Calhoun's guys, Ollie was on the staff under Calhoun from 2010 until he took over in 2012. He was a part of the 2011 championship as an assistant coach and won another in 2014 as head coach. He went through off the court issues with his marriage and although he recruited well at UConn, many of his highest rated players just didn't pan out due to injuries and other issues. He won at least 20 games in his first four seasons. Then the wheels fell off.

The AAC was a competitive league and UConn was not able to dominate it. That was a double edged sword because that caused the fanbase to get restless and indifferent. Losing to schools that most of our fans never heard of like Tulsa was like an indignity. It was kind of like trap game after trap game. UConn's fans and player weren't excited for most of them but they got all of their opponents best efforts. Everyone wanted to beat and humiliate arrogant UConn in the AAC and I don't blame them. I get that 100%.

An honest, blunt and fair assessment, giving the AAC its due. Well done. Respect offered.

I've posted many times that I believe UConn eventually will find a quality all-sports league that will be better for its football program than independence and better for its high-quality baseball program than Big East baseball (though I've come around the past season or two to appreciate BE baseball more so than my pro-SEC/Vandy baseball bias would have allowed, say, four years ago). Until that league materializes (and it could be, if the NCAA allows, a "football only" conference that allows UConn to stay in the Big East for all other sports and be joined in the BE by Syracuse, Boston College, Pitt, Wake, etc.), your Huskies will be fine in the Big East with its outstanding men's hoops.

(10-30-2023 02:51 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  I made this counter-example a few years ago, but consider this: what if UCLA was left behind with other PAC schools leaving for greener pastures? Either through a called-up MWC in the PAC, or placement in the MWC, UCLA goes from playing USC, Arizona, Washington, Oregon, California, etc. (with its program history) to San Diego State, San Jose State, Wyoming, Boise State, etc. UCLA, like UConn, is a blue blood. It *shouldn't* experience a downgrade with on-court performance or fan support. But what happens the first time they lose to a Fresno State? Or a Utah State? There would be a few, not majority, of fans that would stop going to games, because of the drop-off in opponents. What happens that first year that they don't make the NCAAT? Those pockets of fans that stop coming start to grow. Then ratings aren't as strong. Perhaps it becomes more challenging to recruit.

Within relegation, it is very, very easy for one bad season to turn into a bad stretch of years into a bad era - until finally that program is stuck where it is. The team that drops down is expected to win every game (and conference), and, inevitably, when that team loses or doesn't win that conference, the reputation and perception suffers. It has been beaten to death like a dead horse around here, but UConn is so institutionally unique that no other program can really compare with it (in terms of athletic department history, conference affiliation, program success, etc.). However, UConn is like any other program in the country where if it is dropped down, the auxiliary metrics would undoubtedly decline with it. Some are very quick to defend a conference against causing that, but the effects are very real.

A spot-on assessment. Agree fully.

(10-30-2023 11:54 AM)Bogg Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 10:43 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  I'm not buying that it was the BE that improved UConn's program.

Yeah, UConn caught lightning in a bottle last season, but it was a year for the little guys. It's not like they were battling Duke, Kentucky and Kansas in the final 4. Miami plays in a major league but were always the doormat. FAU came from nowhere and who would ever expect to make it to the NCAA finals and get to play SDSU???

UConn just plain couldn't cut it in the AAC. If UC wasn't kicking their a$$, Houston was.

*UConn gets placed in a regional with Kansas and UCLA as the 1/2 seeds*

"It was a year for the little guys!"

And... Yukon played neither of them.

(10-30-2023 04:46 PM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 11:54 AM)Bogg Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 10:43 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  I'm not buying that it was the BE that improved UConn's program.

Yeah, UConn caught lightning in a bottle last season, but it was a year for the little guys. It's not like they were battling Duke, Kentucky and Kansas in the final 4. Miami plays in a major league but were always the doormat. FAU came from nowhere and who would ever expect to make it to the NCAA finals and get to play SDSU???

UConn just plain couldn't cut it in the AAC. If UC wasn't kicking their a$$, Houston was.

*UConn gets placed in a regional with Kansas and UCLA as the 1/2 seeds*

"It was a year for the little guys!"

And... Yukon played neither of them.

Because they bowed out early and UConn washed the teams that beat them. They should simply have won the games they played rather than losing them, and then they'd be champions instead.

If there's one thing I've learned from Cincy fans it's that the truest victories are won on Tuesday nights in January, because regular season "championships" are the most accurate record of who was the best team.

(10-30-2023 05:00 PM)Bogg Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 04:46 PM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 11:54 AM)Bogg Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 10:43 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  I'm not buying that it was the BE that improved UConn's program.

Yeah, UConn caught lightning in a bottle last season, but it was a year for the little guys. It's not like they were battling Duke, Kentucky and Kansas in the final 4. Miami plays in a major league but were always the doormat. FAU came from nowhere and who would ever expect to make it to the NCAA finals and get to play SDSU???

UConn just plain couldn't cut it in the AAC. If UC wasn't kicking their a$$, Houston was.

*UConn gets placed in a regional with Kansas and UCLA as the 1/2 seeds*

"It was a year for the little guys!"

And... Yukon played neither of them.

Because they bowed out early and UConn washed the teams that beat them. They should simply have won the games they played rather than losing them, and then they'd be champions instead.

If there's one thing I've learned from Cincy fans it's that the truest victories are won on Tuesday nights in January, because regular season "championships" are the most accurate record of who was the best team.

You're right. What would Yukon know about that?

(10-30-2023 05:10 PM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  You're right. What would Yukon know about that?

Called it.

(10-29-2023 12:32 PM)darkdragon99 Wrote:  https://www.ctpost.com/opinion/article/s...52750.php#

Key quote:

"What we could do is stop worrying about UConn football as the school’s only way forward. That’s a recipe for being disappointed year after year. College football doesn’t want UConn. And the school's athletics future shouldn’t have to depend on it."

The Big East is, and always has been, a conference of rivals. As a Villanova guy, hate UConn -- and I love to hate them. I love showing up to Madison Square Garden in March and playing them for a league title.

It's much the same for the players. These rivalries matter more than just about any other league.

Take those rivalries away and replace them with away games at Tulsa, Tulane, and East Carolina, and UConn's recruiting and fan support will suffer. I'm sure there were other factors at play as well, but the Big East is better with UConn and UConn is better in the Big East.

(10-30-2023 03:08 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 11:49 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  UConn men's hoops underachieved in the AAC for multiple reasons. To limit the reason to one factor (bad coaches, bad AAC teams, fans didn't care, etc.) is too simplistic a take.

In theory, UConn with a legit coach (and Hurley has emerged as such) should be able to win in whatever league it is a member due to its tremendous history and resources.

I sometimes wonder if some posters distort the negative impact of the AAC on UConn (and, yes, membership in that league was, indeed, detrimental to UConn hoops) so as take the opportunity to denigrate the AAC. Conversely, there are some anti-UConn types on this board who seemingly are sometimes unwilling to fully note some of the problems AAC membership caused UConn.

This is pretty spot on. It was a confluence of factors. Ollie did a great job his first 2 years and for people who dismiss his initial success as just coaching Calhoun's guys, Ollie was on the staff under Calhoun from 2010 until he took over in 2012. He was a part of the 2011 championship as an assistant coach and won another in 2014 as head coach. He went through off the court issues with his marriage and although he recruited well at UConn, many of his highest rated players just didn't pan out due to injuries and other issues. He won at least 20 games in his first four seasons. Then the wheels fell off.

The AAC was a competitive league and UConn was not able to dominate it. That was a double edged sword because that caused the fanbase to get restless and indifferent. Losing to schools that most of our fans never heard of like Tulsa was like an indignity. It was kind of like trap game after trap game. UConn's fans and player weren't excited for most of them but they got all of their opponents best efforts. Everyone wanted to beat and humiliate arrogant UConn in the AAC and I don't blame them. I get that 100%.

You also had a program in the northeastern-most point of the conference that extended as far west as Dallas or Tulsa, and as far south as the Gulf. Maybe, MAYBE Temple is a bus ride. But, compared to the old haunts in the Big East, you didn't have that consistent "stretch" like you had in the AAC year after year. Yes, it is more than, "well, ECU sucks." It's bigger than "Ollie couldn't coach." It's as you say...a confluence. Ollie may have been an okay coach, but couldn't manage the kids to endure a conference season with a lot of travel, opponent ennui, and other detractors to add to whatever he couldn't do to fill in the gaps. And fan support.

It worked, then it didn't.

(10-30-2023 08:25 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 03:08 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 11:49 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  UConn men's hoops underachieved in the AAC for multiple reasons. To limit the reason to one factor (bad coaches, bad AAC teams, fans didn't care, etc.) is too simplistic a take.

In theory, UConn with a legit coach (and Hurley has emerged as such) should be able to win in whatever league it is a member due to its tremendous history and resources.

I sometimes wonder if some posters distort the negative impact of the AAC on UConn (and, yes, membership in that league was, indeed, detrimental to UConn hoops) so as take the opportunity to denigrate the AAC. Conversely, there are some anti-UConn types on this board who seemingly are sometimes unwilling to fully note some of the problems AAC membership caused UConn.

This is pretty spot on. It was a confluence of factors. Ollie did a great job his first 2 years and for people who dismiss his initial success as just coaching Calhoun's guys, Ollie was on the staff under Calhoun from 2010 until he took over in 2012. He was a part of the 2011 championship as an assistant coach and won another in 2014 as head coach. He went through off the court issues with his marriage and although he recruited well at UConn, many of his highest rated players just didn't pan out due to injuries and other issues. He won at least 20 games in his first four seasons. Then the wheels fell off.

The AAC was a competitive league and UConn was not able to dominate it. That was a double edged sword because that caused the fanbase to get restless and indifferent. Losing to schools that most of our fans never heard of like Tulsa was like an indignity. It was kind of like trap game after trap game. UConn's fans and player weren't excited for most of them but they got all of their opponents best efforts. Everyone wanted to beat and humiliate arrogant UConn in the AAC and I don't blame them. I get that 100%.

You also had a program in the northeastern-most point of the conference that extended as far west as Dallas or Tulsa, and as far south as the Gulf. Maybe, MAYBE Temple is a bus ride. But, compared to the old haunts in the Big East, you didn't have that consistent "stretch" like you had in the AAC year after year. Yes, it is more than, "well, ECU sucks." It's bigger than "Ollie couldn't coach." It's as you say...a confluence. Ollie may have been an okay coach, but couldn't manage the kids to endure a conference season with a lot of travel, opponent ennui, and other detractors to add to whatever he couldn't do to fill in the gaps. And fan support.

It worked, then it didn't.

To put it another way, schools will put up with terrible geography and dropping rivals if it means making Big Ten money or even reduced ACC money just to have power conference status.

If that money and status isn’t there combined with bad geography and no rivals, then that generally doesn’t make a school happy. When you then add a lack of success in either football and basketball and dwindling fan support on top of it all, then the school eventually gets diabolical. UConn at least got back power conference status in the sport that it cares the most about (basketball) even if it’s not making the money and I think they simply would rather play an independent football schedule compared to going to a G5 league as a football-only member. Of course, there’s no question that UConn would go to any of the P4 as a full member, but as long as that’s not on the table, then it looks like the status quo.

(10-30-2023 08:25 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 03:08 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 11:49 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  UConn men's hoops underachieved in the AAC for multiple reasons. To limit the reason to one factor (bad coaches, bad AAC teams, fans didn't care, etc.) is too simplistic a take.

In theory, UConn with a legit coach (and Hurley has emerged as such) should be able to win in whatever league it is a member due to its tremendous history and resources.

I sometimes wonder if some posters distort the negative impact of the AAC on UConn (and, yes, membership in that league was, indeed, detrimental to UConn hoops) so as take the opportunity to denigrate the AAC. Conversely, there are some anti-UConn types on this board who seemingly are sometimes unwilling to fully note some of the problems AAC membership caused UConn.

This is pretty spot on. It was a confluence of factors. Ollie did a great job his first 2 years and for people who dismiss his initial success as just coaching Calhoun's guys, Ollie was on the staff under Calhoun from 2010 until he took over in 2012. He was a part of the 2011 championship as an assistant coach and won another in 2014 as head coach. He went through off the court issues with his marriage and although he recruited well at UConn, many of his highest rated players just didn't pan out due to injuries and other issues. He won at least 20 games in his first four seasons. Then the wheels fell off.

The AAC was a competitive league and UConn was not able to dominate it. That was a double edged sword because that caused the fanbase to get restless and indifferent. Losing to schools that most of our fans never heard of like Tulsa was like an indignity. It was kind of like trap game after trap game. UConn's fans and player weren't excited for most of them but they got all of their opponents best efforts. Everyone wanted to beat and humiliate arrogant UConn in the AAC and I don't blame them. I get that 100%.

You also had a program in the northeastern-most point of the conference that extended as far west as Dallas or Tulsa, and as far south as the Gulf. Maybe, MAYBE Temple is a bus ride. But, compared to the old haunts in the Big East, you didn't have that consistent "stretch" like you had in the AAC year after year. Yes, it is more than, "well, ECU sucks." It's bigger than "Ollie couldn't coach." It's as you say...a confluence. Ollie may have been an okay coach, but couldn't manage the kids to endure a conference season with a lot of travel, opponent ennui, and other detractors to add to whatever he couldn't do to fill in the gaps. And fan support.

It worked, then it didn't.

Go back and watch the 2015 UH-UConn game. Or even just find the box score and compare the rosters and the recruiting rankings. UConn had plenty of talent on the team (multiple 5 stars and 4-5 four star players) and yet they couldn’t even beat a truly awful UH team loaded with juco and 2 stars. Recruiting wasn’t their issue. Their issue was that Ollie for whatever reason wasn’t able to maximize the talent he had. Their recruiting didn’t drop off until another couple seasons by which point it was obvious that Ollie was doing a poor job developing talent and that he was losing the support of the fan base. None of that had to do with being in the AAC. Mick Cronin didn’t have any issue keeping Cincy competitive in the AAC. Larry Brown didn’t struggle at SMU. Kelvin Sampson was able to win at Houston. Penny Hardaway has succeeded at Memphis. A good coach was more than capable of winning in the American (at least in the previous iteration of it).

It's not hard to figure out that DePaul, Georgetown, Marquette, Providence, St. John's, Seton Hall, and Villanova means a lot more to Uconn than the AAC schools. Fit and rivalries matter and you can't just make either those happen. Schools and conferences aren't interchangeable parts, even though it looks like it, lately.

(10-30-2023 05:30 PM)Bogg Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 05:10 PM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  You're right. What would Yukon know about that?

Called it.

That Yukon couldn't hack it in the AAC? Yes.

(10-31-2023 08:17 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 05:30 PM)Bogg Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 05:10 PM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  You're right. What would Yukon know about that?

Called it.

That Yukon couldn't hack it in the AAC? Yes.

Right, but they have been able to hack it in a better conference, the Big East.

IMO this suggests the problem was the AAC dragging UConn down.

(10-31-2023 08:17 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 05:30 PM)Bogg Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 05:10 PM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  You're right. What would Yukon know about that?

Called it.

That Yukon couldn't hack it in the AAC? Yes.

I mean, UConn was the most successful program in the AAC during their time there - three straight conference championship games, a conference title, and a national title in one of the years they were conference runner-up. The problem was that there was a significant gap between where the bar was set for "most successful in the American" and the minimum acceptable at UConn.

Memphis made the NCAATs nine out of ten years from 2003-2013 (the year before joining the AAC); it made the NCAAT just one time (2014) before UConn left. Temple made the NCAATs six straight years prior to arriving in the AAC (2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013); it only made the NCAAT twice from 2013-2020. Wichita State made the NCAATs six straight years prior to joining the AAC (2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017, including nine NCAAT victories over that span); since joining the AAC - two NCAAT appearances and zero NCAAT wins.

The reality is that the AAC (2013-2020) was an under-performing men's basketball conference, despite UConn winning a national championship in 2014. Many programs failed to sustain or even match their historical norms within previous conference affiliations, with the remaining programs continuing their trends. At the start, the goal that the top of the league (UConn, Cincinnati, Memphis, Temple), would not only counter the bottom (Tulane, ECU, UCF and USF) but elevate the middle (Houston, SMU, Tulsa) ended up failing. The lack of basketball success was the main driver that Wichita State was added, and they have not met expectations either. The one and only program that left the AAC in a better basketball position than it started was Houston, and tremendous credit should be given to their administration, Sampson and their athletic department for not only turning their program around, but making it a revenue generator for the school (and key value for Big 12 inclusion).

The lack of basketball program history by several programs, absence of shared historical conference affiliations among members and too spread out geography for a non-power conference, as well as failed coaching hires (Kevin Ollie, Larry Brown, Tubby Smith, John Brannen, Frank Haith, Aaron McKie) led to a disappointing and underachieving era of AAC 1.0. The group never had one season where everything clicked, despite its clear potential.