Irish fan on why UConn belongs in the ACC

[Yawkey Way]

Go visit the UNC board for instance, where people are clamoring to trade UConn for BC.

So now Uconn fans want me to listen to UNC fans ?. Go onto this Boneyard site's basketball board , spend an hour there, then come back and tell me what Uconn basketball fans think of Duke and UNC fans thoughts on just about anything at all. ( haha!)+

 

[upstater]

BC football would be playing Uconn in football in the BE now, if it was not for Miami. BC , a charter school Founding member of the BE, voted " yes " for Uconn's admittance, including football, into the BE. BC tried for years to convince unhapy Miami to stay. But once Miami had had enough of the basketball people running the BE, Miami decided to leave and go to the ACC. BC saw this as a mortal blow to the BE, and quickly decide to join Miami in its quest to leave the BE... Uconn football had nothing to do with BC electing to follow Miami to the ACC, but Blumenthal thought so, and launched his ill advised lwasuit against BC, and the others in the ACC, including the ACC Commish. As it turns out, BC was right.. with the loss of MIAMI football, the BE would fall apart. But if Miami had stayed, BC was going to be playing Uconn in the BE if that league stayed together, and BC knew this when they voted to accept Uconn into the BE... but the bolting of Miami, the lawsuit, the acrimony flying out of Uconn, the last football game played in Hartford, etc changed everything, and so thats where we're at today

Your view of reality is warped. As an original member of the BE, there is no way anyone was going to vote no. Especially for a school that held the conference together back in 1993. And UConn didn't sue BC because they took off to the ACC. That's just your revisionist history. They were sued for what they did when in charge of the reorg of the BE. Heck, there was more acrimony coming out of Syracuse and Pitt toward BC. Which once again shows the lawsuit excuse is a smokescreen. DeFilippo laid it out quite explicitly. It's about turf. It's about fear.

 

[Yawkey Way]

Your view of reality is warped. As an original member of the BE, there is no way anyone was going to vote no. .

What are you talking about ? I just thought you told us that schools voted " no " to Uconn's potential consideration for an ACC invite because of BC's alleged enormous power and influence in the ACC with the other schools. The BE also took a long standing member of the BE in Temple and voted " no " to the continuation of this football member in the BE , and it resulted in their being bounced out of the BE league... so I don't get where you say that there is a fear of voting " no " in a league for either invites, or expulsions.

 

[BC1978]

I went to school in Boston. I have a very good idea of how much they matter. And you're wrong about Bob Ryan "making" that point. he did no such thing. He reported what the BC AD people told him. It was not his point to make.

Look, what happened to BC in basketball was a lack of talent after a certain point. Skinner brought you back. But you can't deny that you had very good players from Conn. in the mid 1980s. You had Jay Murphy, John Garris, John Bagley, Michael Adams, etc. Those were all Conn. kids. Heck, Camby at UMass was a Conn. kid too. Then Calhoun moved in and started grabbing the Chris Smith's, the Scott Burrell's etc., and that changed things. It changed things for Villanova as well because they were grabbing Harold Pressley, John Pinone, Harold Jensen, etc., from Conn.

Now, this doesn't mean UConn is fertile recruiting territory for football or basketball. But BC and Syracuse have sure benefited from having a weak UConnin the mid to late 80s, and NO UConn football. Heck, Syracuse has had a steady pipeline of Conn. talent, spanning from Floyd Little to Dwight Freeney and Tebucky Jones, onward.

Well, I do recall that article. It was mostly an opinion piece. BR was venting re: BC's move to the ACC at the time. In the article he made on oblique reference to the view of an unnamed person in the BC AD. That article was mostly an opinion piece, however. We will have to just agree to disagree.

Your comments about BC basketball are a bit incomplete. Certainly JC moving onto the scene had an impact, no question. But it hardly forever changed things. BC went on to have very good years - with success - in the early-mid 2000's with players that did not end up at Uconn - Craig Smith, Jared Dudley, Ryan Sidney, Troy Bell, Tyrese Rice, Uka Agbai, Sean Williams (at least for awhile), etc.

 

[Yawkey Way]

So, you agree your admissions claim is a total hoax?

Are you implying that Uconn has football recruits that can get thru BC Admissions as easily as they can thru Uconn admissions ?

 

[RegisteredUconn]

I'd take Swofford over Delaney in 5 seconds. Delaney has taken the 1940s, 50s, 60s, and 70s conference dynasty and ran it into the ground. In the 25 years since Delaney has been commissioner of the Big Ten they only have 1 basketball national championship and only 2 football national championships, and they lose almost every Rose Bowl. And this is with all of the eastern and midwestern media in America singing their praise to the high heavens and over rating their teams every season in the polls.

That's a nice little elevator speech there Stimpy. The results you cite undoubtedly have a lot to do with why the B1G is in the process of undergoing radical change. They haven't been living up to the lofty expectations they set for themselves. Props to Delany for seeing that and reacting. Looks like Delany & Co. have begun taking the B1G in a new, eastwardly direction in order to expand their historical base. Good for them.

 

[BC1978]

Your view of reality is warped. As an original member of the BE, there is no way anyone was going to vote no. Especially for a school that held the conference together back in 1993. And UConn didn't sue BC because they took off to the ACC. That's just your revisionist history. They were sued for what they did when in charge of the reorg of the BE. Heck, there was more acrimony coming out of Syracuse and Pitt toward BC. Which once again shows the lawsuit excuse is a smokescreen. DeFilippo laid it out quite explicitly. It's about turf. It's about fear.

Upstater, I don't believe you are correct. BC was first sued with Miami and the ACC when it was announced they were leaving for the ACC - that was before the ACC voted to include just Miami and VT and before BC's subsequent work in the BE reorganization. The plaintiffs then dropped BC as a defendant only to reinstate them as a defendant in October 2003 when BC did indeed secure an ACC invite.

The initial lawsuit against BC had nothing to do with BC being "in charge of the reorg of the BE", no?

 

[Yawkey Way]

I don't know why you have so much difficulty reading. UConn was an original member of the BE. UConn was NOT an original member of the ACC.

Holy cow.

I'm referring of course to football here, not basketball, as it is on the basis of football that the P5 is making their decisions. Uconn football applied for ( along with Villanova ) in 1997 for a BE invite for football. BC voted " yes " for Uconn's acceptance into the BE in FOOTBALL... and that was my point, of course.

 

[BCINGYA]

I went to school in Boston. I have a very good idea of how much they matter. And you're wrong about Bob Ryan "making" that point. he did no such thing. He reported what the BC AD people told him. It was not his point to make.

Look, what happened to BC in basketball was a lack of talent after a certain point. Skinner brought you back. But you can't deny that you had very good players from Conn. in the mid 1980s. You had Jay Murphy, John Garris, John Bagley, Michael Adams, etc. Those were all Conn. kids. Heck, Camby at UMass was a Conn. kid too. Then Calhoun moved in and started grabbing the Chris Smith's, the Scott Burrell's etc., and that changed things. It changed things for Villanova as well because they were grabbing Harold Pressley, John Pinone, Harold Jensen, etc., from Conn.

Now, this doesn't mean UConn is fertile recruiting territory for football or basketball. But BC and Syracuse have sure benefited from having a weak UConnin the mid to late 80s, and NO UConn football. Heck, Syracuse has had a steady pipeline of Conn. talent, spanning from Floyd Little to Dwight Freeney and Tebucky Jones, onward.

Wow......like a reporter of his caliber can't see between the lines and was force fed info from B.C. The lengths some people will go to.... in order to feed their own agenda is startling. Simply toss aside any valid information if it contradicts said opinion because it does not fit into the negative B.C. campaign you are so fond of pushing. So Bob Ryan is a an experienced, well respected reporter 99 % of the time.....but he is misguided, weak, and easily manipulated 1% of the time if he writes a positive perspective on B.C. It makes total since I guess, B.C. pulls all the strings in the A.C.C. ...naturally B.C. has just as much pull and influence with the local media as well ....phew ..Glad that is straightened out.

 

[upstater]

Well, I do recall that article. It was mostly an opinion piece. BR was venting re: BC's move to the ACC at the time. In the article he made on oblique reference to the view of an unnamed person in the BC AD. That article was mostly an opinion piece, however. We will have to just agree to disagree.

Your comments about BC basketball are a bit incomplete. Certainly JC moving onto the scene had an impact, no question. But it hardly forever changed things. BC went on to have very good years - with success - in the early-mid 2000's with players that did not end up at Uconn - Craig Smith, Jared Dudley, Ryan Sidney, Troy Bell, Tyrese Rice, Uka Agbai, Sean Williams (at least for awhile), etc.

We're talking about different articles. The anecdote that many of us here remember came a year before BC tried to split for the ACC and was blocked by Virginia Tech. It was in Bob's Sunday notes, and it was only one of those anecdotes a couple lines long. He was quoting a source at BC and expressing surprise. It was not his point to make.

BC stopped having success with northeastern players. Where were the guys you listed from? And BC didn't advance with any of those guys very far into the tourney, like they had with the Conn. kids in the mid 1990s.

 

[upstater]

Are you implying that Uconn has football recruits that can get thru BC Admissions as easily as they can thru Uconn admissions ?

BC has no filters on its admissions. Sean Williams, Dudley, Harley, Brokaw and a wave of others have proven that.

 

[upstater]

Upstater, I don't believe you are correct. BC was first sued with Miami and the ACC when it was announced they were leaving for the ACC - that was before the ACC voted to include just Miami and VT and before BC's subsequent work in the BE reorganization. The plaintiffs then dropped BC as a defendant only to reinstate them as a defendant in October 2003 when BC did indeed secure an ACC invite.

The initial lawsuit against BC had nothing to do with BC being "in charge of the reorg of the BE", no?

Yes, you're right, but the case wasn't heard until BC informed the BE of leaving. So BC's latter actions were considered.

Let me ask you this: don't you think it's a farce that BC's reasons for continuing to talk to the ACC at the time (while heading BE reorg) was its uneasiness with Louisville's academics? Talk about irony!!! I think this shows what was really going on. BC leaving was good for them and understandable, but not while heading reorg, and to then claim that it was Louisville's academics which caused them to go to the ACC? Preposterous.

 

[upstater]

I'm referring of course to football here, not basketball, as it is on the basis of football that the P5 is making their decisions. Uconn football applied for ( along with Villanova ) in 1997 for a BE invite for football. BC voted " yes " for Uconn's acceptance into the BE in FOOTBALL... and that was my point, of course.

I can't make it any clearer for you. UConn was an original member of the BE. A charter member. I can't see what is so difficult to understand about that. It would be the height of absurdity to suggest they were going to be checked out by BC. The ACC is a totally different story. I can safely say that 99% of the posters reading this, including other BC fans, understand the difference that you can't seem to comprehend.

 

[upstater]

Wow.like a reporter of his caliber can't see between the lines and was force fed info from B.C. The lengths some people will go to.... in order to feed their own agenda is startling. Simply toss aside any valid information if it contradicts said opinion because it does not fit into the negative B.C. campaign you are so fond of pushing. So Bob Ryan is a an experienced, well respected reporter 99 % of the time.....but he is misguided, weak, and easily manipulated 1% of the time if he writes a positive perspective on B.C. It makes total since I guess, B.C. pulls all the strings in the A.C.C. ...naturally B.C. has just as much pull and influence with the local media as well ....phew ..Glad that is straightened out.

What are you going on about here? It makes no sense. All I said was that Bob Ryan quoted a member of the BC AD. That is a fact. I can care less about Bob Ryan otherwise.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

... But anyway, Maryland has been a bottom feeder in football attendance. So how does Maryland going to the BUG make the BUG seem brilliantly run while the ACC replacing Maryland with a school with more football fans than Maryland makes the ACC leadership seem weak?

Because the B1G appears to be following a well conceived strategy to achieve a laudable objective. Swofford's actions seem to follow those of a sophomore whose dating strategy is to hump the next pretty coed who crosses his path. When his buddies ask him what they'll talk about after, his answer is, "It was Louisville. It wasn't like I was trying to get into Madam Curie's pants."

 

[BC1978]

Yes, you're right, but the case wasn't heard until BC informed the BE of leaving. So BC's latter actions were considered.

Let me ask you this: don't you think it's a farce that BC's reasons for continuing to talk to the ACC at the time (while heading BE reorg) was its uneasiness with Louisville's academics? Talk about irony!!! I think this shows what was really going on. BC leaving was good for them and understandable, but not while heading reorg, and to then claim that it was Louisville's academics which caused them to go to the ACC? Preposterous.

Upstater, my limited point was to dispute your claim that BC was only sued because of their work on the BE reorganization, which was clearly false. Whether other claims were subsequently added when the case was heard (I don't know) is irrelevant to the point you were making that BC was sued ONLY because of their work on the reorganization. Fair enough?

Regarding your second point. No one knows definitively what, when, and how often BC spoke with the ACC during that June-October, 2003 timeframe. According to the BE minutes, BC did claim that they were concerned about academics - but they also were concerned that the BE abandoned its earlier intention to move to an all-sports conference as they stated that a hybrid would ultimately be unworkable (something that turned out to be quite correct, FWIW).

At any rate, where BC's explanations a bit self serving? Probably, IMO. I will concede that. That said, BC hardly has the corner on self-serving statements or actions, do they? A few years later, several teams left the BE shortly after they reportedly rejected a lucrative ESPN media offer. Why doesn't that incur the same anger around here? Does anybody think these schools may have been talking to other conferences around this time? Were the best interests of the BE conference served at the time? Just as with BC, I don't know who said what to when and whom. None of this may be relevant. I just find it very interesting that these other guys get a pass from you folks.

The same is true for the exit fees. There was widespread anger when BC successfully challenged the exit fees in court (successfully arguing that the old exit fees applied rather than the new, then improperly adopted ones); yet no one seemed to care around here when several of the other schools likewise challenged the exit provisions in court or sought to modify them.

To get back to your earlier question, IMO, ALL schools will operate in their own best interests and will do and say things in accordance with that operative principle. I think the events of the past few years would probably support my statement. I just find the selective indignation fascinating, that's all.

 

[Yawkey Way]

BC has no filters on its admissions. Sean Williams, Dudley, Harley, Brokaw and a wave of others have proven that.

Man, that sure would be news then to former Basketball Coaches, Jim O' Brien, Paul Biamcardi as they were both bounced out of BC as Coaches at BC, primarily by the singular direct influence of BC Admissions Director Mahoney on recuits they tried to squeeze thru BC Admissions. But look, Uconn , when to comes to college sports, is essentially a basketball school. I'll make no effort to try and make the case on BC Basketball, fortunes, woes, and what not... and compare it with Uconn. Its irrelevent anyway on why the phones arn't ringing for Uconn right now. And we should all be able to agree that Uconn basketball is wonderful and outstanding despite this, as much as we realize that basketball to these P5 leagues is mostly irrelevent to who they invite and don't invite. I'm trying to stick as much as possible to football here, as I think we all agree that college football primarily drives the bus ( and the networks, and their advertisers ) on these league realignments.

 

[UConn9604]

Beating the out of BC for 10 straight years may not have been a rivalry, but it sure was fun taking over Conte and watching that.

It was a LOT longer than that...

 

[Yawkey Way]

Randy Edsall claimed the same thing about UConn. Come'on! Be honest. The players I mentioned had academic troubles in high school. Yet they ended up at BC.

Lets not talk about an overall comparison of the " academic troubles " in High School and,more importantly, in college, between recruits arrivals and departures at the schools of Uconn and BC. Good grief, it wasn't basketball that got JC in trouble with both his school and the NCAA. It was primarily " academic troubles " galore on his basketball team. So this a bigtime losing comparison for you under any objective criteria you'd choose to utilize if the discussion takes a turn on a disccusion toward " Academics".. Besides, its all irrelevent anyway to football, and how and why the leagues make the decisions of school memberships in these leagues.

 

[BC1978]

The case was heard well after BC left and after they headed the reorg. The case actually discussed BC's heading of the org, so it wasn't false. It was initiated however long before that, so you are correct about that. But the actions that followed were also part of the case.

The minutes of the meeting clearly show that BC was blaming Louisville's academics. But beyond that, the statements made by BC as to the hybrid conference were already fait accompli because the meeting (when those minutes were taken) occurred AFTER the Notre Dame vote that killed the potential split. In other words, BC already knew well before the meeting with the minutes that the teams could not split because of ND's vote. And they still headed the reorg even after the previous vote, so the comments about a hybrid league are disingenuous at best and they were only uttered because BC knew it was leaving even as it headed the reorg.

as for selective indignation, the principle is simple. You can check out any time you want, but you can't lie to everyone while heading up the reorganization of the conference. Heck, that's a principle even in the cutthroat world of corporate America. People get sued all the time for doing that.

Upstater, regarding your first point, you are arguing something that has nothing to do with my response. ALL I was doing was responding to this comment of yours to the other BC poster.:
"And UConn didn't sue BC because they took off to the ACC. That's just your revisionist history. They were sued for what they did when in charge of the reorg of the BE."
This statement is not true, plain and simple. The poster was not being engaging in revisionist history. BC was not sued initially because of their work on the on the BE reorg. They were sued because they were jumping to the ACC. Sure, when they were added back to the suit, other claims to the suit may have been added based on the reorg business - but that was not the reason why they were sued in the first place - which you had claimed. If BC had done NO work on the BR reorg, they still would have been added back to the suit based on the claims in the original lawsuit.

Regarding your other points, we are going to have to agree to disagree lest we go down a rathole of back and forths. Again, my limited point was not speaking to what BC did or did not do. You and others have your views on that. My comments - which you seemed to gloss over - is my fascination over the lack of any anger or any questions at all over the actions of other schools. (Hence my selective indignation comments.)

 

[BC1978]

The lack of anger comes from not holding it against schools that want to move to another conference.

I understand , but again, your are glossing over my question. The point I raised was that several schools left the BE in a relatively short period of time after reportedly turning down what was reported to be a generous ESPN media offer.

I am NOT making a connection between the two. Fact is, I have no idea. I am only saying that in the BC case, it is accepted fact here that BC lied about its involvement with the ACC in the summer of 2003 when they were taking part in the BE reorg. There are no records of any discussions between BC and the ACC during the summer months that you can point to to support this. Only in the fall after BC said they were going to reengage the ACC according to the BE minutes. As I said, in the absence of critical facts, who said what to whom - and when, I cannot debate this with you as it is like trying to prove a negative.

Again, my only point was that I find it fascinating that this whole scrutiny by many here has never been applied to the events surrounding the other schools' departures from the BE shortly after the media deal was rejected.

 

[Yawkey Way]

. Calhoun was in trouble with the school? Say what? What a nutty claim.

Well, we'll just agree to disagree. I view JC's relationship with Uconn to be very strained in their parting. I think he had bigtime" trouble " with his former employer and for quite awhile, until the school and he finally had to sever their relationship. Heck, he'd stll be at Uconn if he had his way, as we all should be able to agree that he misses coaching. How do we know this ? Because he said he misses coaching thats why. So " yes " I do think JC had " trouble with the school " and the school for their part certainly had " trouble " in his off the court stuff as well. Otherwise, they'd have kept him on board, and let him go out on his terms in retirement, not theirs, and not on a time frame they essentially dictated to him... ye

 

[upstater]

Well, we'll just agree to disagree. I view JC's relationship with Uconn to be very strained in their parting. I think he had bigtime" trouble " with his former employer and for quite awhile, until the school and he finally had to sever their relationship. Heck, he'd stll be at Uconn if he had his way, as we all should be able to agree that he misses coaching. How do we know this ? Because he said he misses coaching thats why. So " yes " I do think JC had " trouble with the school " and the school for their part certainly had " trouble " in his off the court stuff as well. Otherwise, they'd have kept him on board, and let him go out on his terms in retirement, not theirs, and not on a time frame they essentially dictated to him... ye

You're in fantasy land. Calhoun is employed by UConn right now and makes a huge salary right now even as we speak. You're just making stuff up. He has an office at UConn and he is employed by them. Wow.

I've never encountered a poster who is here to tell us about how UConn operates, and the facts he spouts are 100% incorrect.

 

[Yawkey Way]

You're in fantasy land. Calhoun is employed by UConn right now and makes a huge salary right now even as we speak. You're just making stuff up. He has an office at UConn and he is employed by them. Wow.

I've never encountered a poster who is here to tell us about how UConn operates, and the facts he spouts are 100% incorrect.

My goodness, if you think that JC's relationship with the school is not strained, then I don't know what to say. If you believe that JC is happy that his school has assigned him to a desk job ( albeit drawing a salary ) and that he's not out there courtside Coaching at Uconn still, then thats that, and you've convinced yourself that things are just peachy between JC and the School.

 

[Sea Goat]

You're in fantasy land. Calhoun is employed by UConn right now and makes a huge salary right now even as we speak. You're just making stuff up. He has an office at UConn and he is employed by them. Wow.

I've never encountered a poster who is here to tell us about how UConn operates, and the facts he spouts are 100% incorrect.

You're in fantasy land. Calhoun is employed by UConn right now and makes a huge salary right now even as we speak. You're just making stuff up. He has an office at UConn and he is employed by them. Wow.

I've never encountered a poster who is here to tell us about how UConn operates, and the facts he spouts are 100% incorrect.

JC was getting older and wanted to slow down. He also had an opportunity to effect change at the UConn HC position to his liking. (Thanks, Jim!) Maybe if JC was younger, maybe if BC showed some promise, maybe if BC didn't advertise their hatred of UConn so publically... IMO for these and other reasons, JC would never be interested in any BC position.