The stated premise was that higher attendance is needed but a competitive team on the field is required to fill the seats. Looking back, UConn could fill its stadium under the right conditions.
Again, Nebraska was kicked out as the emphasis has shifted to Medical research, and research at satellite medical campuses doesn’t count. It would seem UConn is in a similar position as Nebraska.
Lol, you seem to be struggling pretty hard to troll here. I've already answered above, reread my post above and see if can figure out the answer. (Clue - I reject your notion that football stadium sellouts will be the basis for any future expansion. It hasn't been a criteria to date.)
Lol, I don't disagree Z, but we are miles away from being a ranked team. (Especially since we would actually have had to play some games be ranked.) [Shrugs]
It may not be as much as a question if the med school is at a satellite campus, as much as it is not affiliated with the main campus. I believe the UConn Health Center and Storrs campus are affiliated. Many med schools are in other communities than the main campus. Here is what I see from Inside Higher Education:
Do you believe that football attendance (or lack of it) indicates the level of support for the team? Do you believe that support for the team is important in conference realignment? If it’s simply the size of the market that matters, wouldn’t the ACC be going after Columbia or Fordham?
Sure it does, as a snap shot. The point that I made, and that @Zissou figured out was that UConn has drawn well in the past. There is not reason to think that that cannot happen again with a successful team.
I think football is the only sport that matters for conference realignment. Is there any evidence to the contrary?
I am guilty of derailing this ACC thread but since it's off the rails already. . .
But you’ll go unbeaten and get destroyed in the playoffs
You are trying to be kind, but you know that academics are meaningless. Presidents are meaningless. ESPN and the ACC are essentially married. Connecticut lawmakers could have pressured ESPN a decade ago to give UConn a lift, but they were disinterested apparently and now can do nothing about it. The question is who is really making the decisions. UConn fans, including myself, may not have liked your posts over the years, but mostly you have been correct. Not only that, but with each passing year, UConn falls further and further behind as its former peers receive 5 to nearly 10 times the income that UConn receives on a yearly basis. For example, this is made clear by the great strides made by Rutgers since they have joined the Big Ten. I don't think UConn could even compete with them on the basketball court now and forget about football.
Hey Billy I’m guessing here, but we’re sure about that 80% number, which sounds right to me, because Notre Dame has 20% of a normal share? Just curious. You are usually pretty good about having a source when you’re that specific with a number.
No doubt that we could compete. I just can’t see any economic viable reason for anyone to invite us, other than the somewhat tortured logic about Fox.
www.tigernet.com