I diodn't say the BOT member knew what was going on. I saw the BOT member castigated Leahy vitriolically in public in front of academics, so anyone who thinks that BC blackballs UConn because of vitriol in 2003 is being mislead. What is even being contested about the facts I stated here?
I don't know what's being contested. I don't care what BOT member overheard somebody saying to somebody else at a cocktail party.
I think it's crystal clear, what I've stated. Here, I'll do it again. In summer 2003, shortly after Miami made the move to the ACC official, there was a meeting of Big East presidents, chancellors and athletic directors and Big East conference office leadership. At that meeting, all present were made aware, that dissolution of the league, was an option moving forward, and not only an option, subcommittees were formed at that meeting, and it was understood, that in the following weeks, there would be meetings among at least 6 different member schools, to discuss DISSOLUTION OF THE LEAGUE. It was common knowledge at this time, that ACC leadership had been in discussions with several members of the conference.
Three months later, a lawsuit was filed by CT AG Blumenthal, against the ACC leadership, and those same people in that room, that had agreed to discuss disbanding the league, charging them with conspiracy to destroy the league. The primary argument being that the investments made in upgrading football were in danger, and that the people involved in moving had done what they did without the knowledge of the other membership. The integrity and ethics of the people involved were actively questioned. Those people were pissed off, and they still are today. THe fact that UConn took the point, in the face of what the program had been given, was more of an insult.
The investments, were only in danger, if the BCS affiliation were to go away, and that had been solved well before the lawsuits were engaged, and the BCS existence of the conference was not threatened by the move of Boston College and Virginia Tech, with the way things had been handled with the NCAA and with the BCS leadership and the expansion plans in the meantime. The entire college football world knew that the lawsuit was garbage. It made sense to the majority of UCOnn huskies people in the CT, because very few, had any understanding of the BCS.
If I had known about this website, back then, I'd have been saying the same things I'm saying now.
We're still digging out from the relationships in the intercollegiate world that were destroyed completely by the way UConn handled the Miami move to the ACC and subsequent events.
Why anyone might be able question that this is not the case, I have no idea. That there was a better course of action - to do nothing regarding a lawsuit claiming such damages, would have been better? Especially now with hindsight? Boggles my mind.
The only threat to the investment that UCOnn made in the late 1990s, involved the conference affiliation with the BCS revenue streams and the scheduling therefore involved.
The difference now is that the threat is real, and actively happening, while in 2003, it was non-existent, as the actual football members at the time, had secured the BCS arrangment.