(04-21-2014 01:24 PM)UConnFB Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 11:40 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 11:30 AM)Knightsweat Wrote:  I have to say that there is some merit to the idea that UConn's basketball success is decoupled from the AAC. I know thats not a popular opinion, BT there is a ring of truth to that. UConn basketball already had 3 national championships prior to playing in the AAC. Just having USF, Cincy, and Temple still in the same league does not make it "the same as the old BE". I will say however that the real upside is that UConn is an AAC team that is not leaving the conference in the forseeable future, and so their latest NC is definitely a feather in the AAC's hat, regardless of how\where UCONN cut their teeth in big time basketball. The future is bright I guess is my point. UCONN has a chance to be the dominant team in a conference that has good potential.

Nobody even remotely claimed it was the same old Big East. That conference had almost twice as many teams as the AAC.
However, this conference was largely put together by UCONN. ALL of the programs joined UCONN's conference, not the reverse.
These trolls aren't here to offer anything more than to flame threads. This thread was started to recognize the accomplishments of the conference. We all carry the weight of each others successes and failures. That's how it is in conferences. If a program wants to go indy and play an indy schedule than more power to them. They can reap all the glory or scorn. That's life.

Quo and UConnFB are here for nothing more than to belittle our programs. Read my rep points to see how UConnFB thinks.

Oh please. Just because I don't believe that the AAC produced this NC doesn't make me a troll. Grow Up.

Technically, everyone did join "UConn's" conference but it's not like that caused a NC to happen. Is it a feather in the AAC's hat? Absolutely. Did it happen because of the strength of the AAC? Absolutely not.

I see what you did there...

Impressive straw man.



I hope UCONN didn't sharpen your ability to fashion an argument. At the very least, you should go back to High School and learn how to argue concepts that have some kind of empirical basis behind them. Right now, you're merely trying to draw everyone into a rhetoric contest.

(04-21-2014 01:27 PM)UConnFB Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 11:58 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 10:49 AM)UConnFB Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 10:40 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 07:22 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I just don't get this notion of crediting UConn success to the AAC. If Duke was suddenly a member of the MAC next year, and won the national title, it would be silly to characterize that as a MAC victory, right? What would the MAC have had to do with it?

If a school like Michigan State wins the national title, it's fair to give the B1G some credit for that, because MSU is a B1G school through and through. Their program is a product of many years of competing in the B1G. That competition has shaped their program and prepared it for national combat. Same was true of UConn in the old Big East, North Carolina and the ACC, etc.

But that is not true of the AAC, since this is a new conference with radically different membership and of just one year tenure.

So if Cuse, Pitt or Louisville wins a NC, who gets the credit?

UConn is a member of this league, the point is the value of the TV contract and other broadcasting/revenue streams....that is what is being sold and the networks got a steal. Not to mention the recruiting, donations, ticket sale and coaching hiring effects that arise FOR OTHER MEMBERS as a result of a team winning a championship and giving the league exposure. It's really a simple concept to understand.

Having a very recent NC winner is a feather in the cap for the conference when it comes to TV negotiations. But the notion that the AAC "produced" a NC is highly questionable.

The more sober and objective way to look at it is to observe that in the conference's first year of existence, a basketball program won a national championship with players, coaches and a structure that was formed in a different conference.

The idea that any conference at anytime "produces" a NC is absurd to begin with......this was great for the AAC, established the conference as a high end Bball place (Uconn lost several games).....and I have no clue why trolls or negative people try to spin it in anyway negative. It's flat out stupid IMO. This is another "welcome to the internet" moment I suppose.

There is nothing negative to spin. There is just a disagreement on how much a national championship can be attributed to the conference. I say that in year one, almost nothing can be attributed.

It makes more sense to say that UConn won the NC despite being in the AAC, which is really negative, and not really a comment I would endorse.

So a thread discussing a year that has gone very well for the AAC, gets converted into a shat throwing contest, that's productive and fair.

The simple fact is that the UConn win was fantastic for this league. Same with SMU getting a bit of a last laugh with their NIT run and UCF coming up huge against Baylor. People are taking notice and it was huge to get a fast start out of the gate.

(04-21-2014 11:58 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  [UConn's national championship] was great for the AAC, established the conference as a high end Bball place (UConn lost several games).....and I have no clue why trolls or negative people try to spin it in anyway negative. It's flat out stupid IMO.

(04-21-2014 01:48 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  So a thread discussing a year that has gone very well for the AAC, gets converted into a shat throwing contest, that's productive and fair.

The simple fact is that the UConn win was fantastic for this league. Same with SMU getting a bit of a last laugh with their NIT run and UCF coming up huge against Baylor. People are taking notice and it was huge to get a fast start out of the gate.

+1 on both of wavefan'12s posts.


Sunday, 18 September 2011, was the day that Pittsburgh and Syracuse announced they were leaving their longtime conference home and joining the ACC. Ever since then, there has been a continual battle -- from the football fields and the basketball courts to the message-boards and network-studios -- to predict and define what would happen to that old conference. The battle included not only things like membership and TV-contracts, but even what the name of the conference would be.

For a lot of different reasons, a lot of people became deeply invested in the idea that the conference (now called "the American") would be relegated to the same basic level of competitiveness and media-relevance as the MAC or the Sun Belt. Some people honestly thought it would happen, and some people just pretended to think it would happen. Some people wished and hoped for it to happen, some people were afraid it would happen. Yet here we are nearly 3 years later, and it hasn't happened. For people with eyes to see and ears to listen, it is increasingly obvious that it is not going to happen.

Haters are gonna hate and trolls are gonna troll, but the AAC is proving itself to be a major player on the national landscape. UConn's twin championships in MBB and WBB are a big part of that proof. UCF's win over Baylor in the Fiesta Bowl is another. Hiring of big-time MBB coaches at Houston and Tulsa, and the impressive media-visibility of a capable, pro-active commissioner like Mike Aresco, is more.

Even the trolls will eventually figure it out, and they will crawl back under their bridges until they figure out a new line of attack that implicitly acknowledges the new reality.

(04-21-2014 01:28 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 01:24 PM)UConnFB Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 11:40 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 11:30 AM)Knightsweat Wrote:  I have to say that there is some merit to the idea that UConn's basketball success is decoupled from the AAC. I know thats not a popular opinion, BT there is a ring of truth to that. UConn basketball already had 3 national championships prior to playing in the AAC. Just having USF, Cincy, and Temple still in the same league does not make it "the same as the old BE". I will say however that the real upside is that UConn is an AAC team that is not leaving the conference in the forseeable future, and so their latest NC is definitely a feather in the AAC's hat, regardless of how\where UCONN cut their teeth in big time basketball. The future is bright I guess is my point. UCONN has a chance to be the dominant team in a conference that has good potential.

Nobody even remotely claimed it was the same old Big East. That conference had almost twice as many teams as the AAC.
However, this conference was largely put together by UCONN. ALL of the programs joined UCONN's conference, not the reverse.
These trolls aren't here to offer anything more than to flame threads. This thread was started to recognize the accomplishments of the conference. We all carry the weight of each others successes and failures. That's how it is in conferences. If a program wants to go indy and play an indy schedule than more power to them. They can reap all the glory or scorn. That's life.

Quo and UConnFB are here for nothing more than to belittle our programs. Read my rep points to see how UConnFB thinks.

Oh please. Just because I don't believe that the AAC produced this NC doesn't make me a troll. Grow Up.

Technically, everyone did join "UConn's" conference but it's not like that caused a NC to happen. Is it a feather in the AAC's hat? Absolutely. Did it happen because of the strength of the AAC? Absolutely not.

I see what you did there...

Impressive straw man.



I hope UCONN didn't sharpen your ability to fashion an argument. At the very least, you should go back to High School and learn how to argue concepts that have some kind of empirical basis behind them. Right now, you're merely trying to draw everyone into a rhetoric contest.

What strawman? Are you saying that the AAC is why UConn won a national championship?

Sounds like you have a strawman of your own.

This national championship is attributed to UConn. Not the AAC.

(04-21-2014 01:48 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 01:27 PM)UConnFB Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 11:58 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 10:49 AM)UConnFB Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 10:40 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  So if Cuse, Pitt or Louisville wins a NC, who gets the credit?

UConn is a member of this league, the point is the value of the TV contract and other broadcasting/revenue streams....that is what is being sold and the networks got a steal. Not to mention the recruiting, donations, ticket sale and coaching hiring effects that arise FOR OTHER MEMBERS as a result of a team winning a championship and giving the league exposure. It's really a simple concept to understand.

Having a very recent NC winner is a feather in the cap for the conference when it comes to TV negotiations. But the notion that the AAC "produced" a NC is highly questionable.

The more sober and objective way to look at it is to observe that in the conference's first year of existence, a basketball program won a national championship with players, coaches and a structure that was formed in a different conference.

The idea that any conference at anytime "produces" a NC is absurd to begin with......this was great for the AAC, established the conference as a high end Bball place (Uconn lost several games).....and I have no clue why trolls or negative people try to spin it in anyway negative. It's flat out stupid IMO. This is another "welcome to the internet" moment I suppose.

There is nothing negative to spin. There is just a disagreement on how much a national championship can be attributed to the conference. I say that in year one, almost nothing can be attributed.

It makes more sense to say that UConn won the NC despite being in the AAC, which is really negative, and not really a comment I would endorse.

So a thread discussing a year that has gone very well for the AAC, gets converted into a shat throwing contest, that's productive and fair.

The simple fact is that the UConn win was fantastic for this league. Same with SMU getting a bit of a last laugh with their NIT run and UCF coming up huge against Baylor. People are taking notice and it was huge to get a fast start out of the gate.

Is it good for the AAC that a member won the national championship, absolutely.

But it's hardly a testament to the league as whole. Is wasn't like there was something intrinsically special about the conference that set those conditions.

I don't see how this is throwing pie into the face of the conference.

(04-21-2014 02:54 PM)UConnFB Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 01:48 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 01:27 PM)UConnFB Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 11:58 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 10:49 AM)UConnFB Wrote:  Having a very recent NC winner is a feather in the cap for the conference when it comes to TV negotiations. But the notion that the AAC "produced" a NC is highly questionable.

The more sober and objective way to look at it is to observe that in the conference's first year of existence, a basketball program won a national championship with players, coaches and a structure that was formed in a different conference.

The idea that any conference at anytime "produces" a NC is absurd to begin with......this was great for the AAC, established the conference as a high end Bball place (Uconn lost several games).....and I have no clue why trolls or negative people try to spin it in anyway negative. It's flat out stupid IMO. This is another "welcome to the internet" moment I suppose.

There is nothing negative to spin. There is just a disagreement on how much a national championship can be attributed to the conference. I say that in year one, almost nothing can be attributed.

It makes more sense to say that UConn won the NC despite being in the AAC, which is really negative, and not really a comment I would endorse.

So a thread discussing a year that has gone very well for the AAC, gets converted into a shat throwing contest, that's productive and fair.

The simple fact is that the UConn win was fantastic for this league. Same with SMU getting a bit of a last laugh with their NIT run and UCF coming up huge against Baylor. People are taking notice and it was huge to get a fast start out of the gate.

Is it good for the AAC that a member won the national championship, absolutely.

But it's hardly a testament to the league as whole. Is wasn't like there was something intrinsically special about the conference that set those conditions.

I don't see how this is throwing pie into the face of the conference.

...for all your big talk, I would have thought UCONN ran the table in the AAC...



I'm starting to doubt that you have anything to do with UCONN. Because the Huskies conference season simply doesn't back up your bull****. Most educated fans would feel very sheepish about throwing around the crap that seems to flow so smoothly from your mouth. You obviously have low IQ.

James Dickey beat UCONN. At least he did that much for us.

(04-21-2014 02:58 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 02:54 PM)UConnFB Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 01:48 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 01:27 PM)UConnFB Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 11:58 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  The idea that any conference at anytime "produces" a NC is absurd to begin with......this was great for the AAC, established the conference as a high end Bball place (Uconn lost several games).....and I have no clue why trolls or negative people try to spin it in anyway negative. It's flat out stupid IMO. This is another "welcome to the internet" moment I suppose.

There is nothing negative to spin. There is just a disagreement on how much a national championship can be attributed to the conference. I say that in year one, almost nothing can be attributed.

It makes more sense to say that UConn won the NC despite being in the AAC, which is really negative, and not really a comment I would endorse.

So a thread discussing a year that has gone very well for the AAC, gets converted into a shat throwing contest, that's productive and fair.

The simple fact is that the UConn win was fantastic for this league. Same with SMU getting a bit of a last laugh with their NIT run and UCF coming up huge against Baylor. People are taking notice and it was huge to get a fast start out of the gate.

Is it good for the AAC that a member won the national championship, absolutely.

But it's hardly a testament to the league as whole. Is wasn't like there was something intrinsically special about the conference that set those conditions.

I don't see how this is throwing pie into the face of the conference.

...for all your big talk, I would have thought UCONN ran the table in the AAC...



I'm starting to doubt that you have anything to do with UCONN. Because the Huskies conference season simply doesn't back up your bull****. Most educated fans would feel very sheepish about throwing around the crap that seems to flow so smoothly from your mouth. You obviously have low IQ.

James Dickey beat UCONN. At least he did that much for us.

I am starting to suspect that you are hitting the refresh button every 30 seconds.

There were kids on this year's team that now have two rings. It has little to do with the AAC.

Houston would give its left nut to have a season like ours.

Well, I guess credit for UCF's Fiesta victory goes to C-USA, if I follow the logic...right? Couldn't have done it without them.

Big East is replete with excellent basketball pedigree. But most of it was accomplished when a good percentage of the league also being national universities with national names and national recognition. The Big East now has one national university - Georgetown. Does it matter - maybe not. They are strong eastern regional universities and that may be enough.

(04-21-2014 03:09 PM)EdisonDoyle Wrote:  Well, I guess credit for UCF's Fiesta victory goes to C-USA, if I follow the logic...right? Couldn't have done it without them.

Big East is replete with excellent basketball pedigree. But most of it was accomplished when a good percentage of the league also being national universities with national names and national recognition. The Big East now has one national university - Georgetown. Does it matter - maybe not. They are strong eastern regional universities and that may be enough.

UCF's win is a testament to UCF and the program George O'Leary built.

(04-21-2014 03:08 PM)UConnFB Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 02:58 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 02:54 PM)UConnFB Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 01:48 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 01:27 PM)UConnFB Wrote:  There is nothing negative to spin. There is just a disagreement on how much a national championship can be attributed to the conference. I say that in year one, almost nothing can be attributed.

It makes more sense to say that UConn won the NC despite being in the AAC, which is really negative, and not really a comment I would endorse.

So a thread discussing a year that has gone very well for the AAC, gets converted into a shat throwing contest, that's productive and fair.

The simple fact is that the UConn win was fantastic for this league. Same with SMU getting a bit of a last laugh with their NIT run and UCF coming up huge against Baylor. People are taking notice and it was huge to get a fast start out of the gate.

Is it good for the AAC that a member won the national championship, absolutely.

But it's hardly a testament to the league as whole. Is wasn't like there was something intrinsically special about the conference that set those conditions.

I don't see how this is throwing pie into the face of the conference.

...for all your big talk, I would have thought UCONN ran the table in the AAC...



I'm starting to doubt that you have anything to do with UCONN. Because the Huskies conference season simply doesn't back up your bull****. Most educated fans would feel very sheepish about throwing around the crap that seems to flow so smoothly from your mouth. You obviously have low IQ.

James Dickey beat UCONN. At least he did that much for us.

I am starting to suspect that you are hitting the refresh button every 30 seconds.

There were kids on this year's team that now have two rings. It has little to do with the AAC.

Houston would give its left nut to have a season like ours.

Hell, we'd gave up the right one too for a basketball national title. That's immaterial.

Every program has to have a conference season. UCONN is no different. They were repping the conference in the tourney, just as UCF was in the Fiesta Bowl.

That's just fact. Sorry if that doesn't make you happy.

(04-21-2014 03:16 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 03:08 PM)UConnFB Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 02:58 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 02:54 PM)UConnFB Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 01:48 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  So a thread discussing a year that has gone very well for the AAC, gets converted into a shat throwing contest, that's productive and fair.

The simple fact is that the UConn win was fantastic for this league. Same with SMU getting a bit of a last laugh with their NIT run and UCF coming up huge against Baylor. People are taking notice and it was huge to get a fast start out of the gate.

Is it good for the AAC that a member won the national championship, absolutely.

But it's hardly a testament to the league as whole. Is wasn't like there was something intrinsically special about the conference that set those conditions.

I don't see how this is throwing pie into the face of the conference.

...for all your big talk, I would have thought UCONN ran the table in the AAC...



I'm starting to doubt that you have anything to do with UCONN. Because the Huskies conference season simply doesn't back up your bull****. Most educated fans would feel very sheepish about throwing around the crap that seems to flow so smoothly from your mouth. You obviously have low IQ.

James Dickey beat UCONN. At least he did that much for us.

I am starting to suspect that you are hitting the refresh button every 30 seconds.

There were kids on this year's team that now have two rings. It has little to do with the AAC.

Houston would give its left nut to have a season like ours.

Hell, we'd gave up the right one too for a basketball national title. That's immaterial.

Every program has to have a conference season. UCONN is no different. They were repping the conference in the tourney, just as UCF was in the Fiesta Bowl.

That's just fact. Sorry if that doesn't make you happy.

That doesn't mean that the conference schedule is why UConn won.

It happened because it won every game in the tournament and was playing better than every team it played against.

(04-21-2014 03:14 PM)UConnFB Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 03:09 PM)EdisonDoyle Wrote:  Well, I guess credit for UCF's Fiesta victory goes to C-USA, if I follow the logic...right? Couldn't have done it without them.

Big East is replete with excellent basketball pedigree. But most of it was accomplished when a good percentage of the league also being national universities with national names and national recognition. The Big East now has one national university - Georgetown. Does it matter - maybe not. They are strong eastern regional universities and that may be enough.

UCF's win is a testament to UCF and the program George O'Leary built.

Yes, wearing that patch imbued special powers unto Bortles and Napier. Good grief.

(04-21-2014 03:18 PM)UConnFB Wrote:  That doesn't mean that the conference schedule is why UConn won.

Is the conference schedule why Florida State won?

Is the conference schedule why anybody wins?

That doesn't mean that Florida State is not reppin the ACC. Hell, they CARRIED the ACC for YEARS.

Your arguing is weak. There's no point to it.

(04-20-2014 07:22 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(04-20-2014 05:36 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Aresco...meh

The guy is a machine and a constant media pimp. Not sure how anyone wouldn't love the guy.

KT, agreed. I am always pleasantly surprised at how often he appears on College Sports Nation (SiriusXM). He gets detailed too and makes sure to not omit the newcomers --- mentions ECU's 50k football attendance, the facilities work at Tulane, and all the achievements (winning C-USA's bid, for instance) of Tulsa.

The reality is --- there's nothing he or anyone else could have done to prevent the departure of Notre Dame, Louisville, and Rutgers.

I respect the nBE schools and really do wish they had stayed with us. But someone on another thread mentioned how Val Ackerman has been invisible by comparison. I had never thought about it, but absolutely accurate.

(04-21-2014 03:34 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 03:18 PM)UConnFB Wrote:  That doesn't mean that the conference schedule is why UConn won.

Is the conference schedule why Florida State won?

Is the conference schedule why anybody wins?

That doesn't mean that Florida State is not reppin the ACC. Hell, they CARRIED the ACC for YEARS.

Your arguing is weak. There's no point to it.

What is your argument exactly? UConn was wearing AAC patches. This is true. Were we "repping" the AAC. Yeah, OK. But the AAC had little to do with why UConn ended up where it did.

(04-21-2014 03:36 PM)UConnFB Wrote:  What is your argument exactly? UConn was wearing AAC patches. This is true. Were we "repping" the AAC. Yeah, OK. But the AAC had little to do with why UConn ended up where it did.

Just like my car had little to do with me getting to work today.

I would have walked if I didn't have my car.



There. That's the crux of your logic.

But, make no mistake, I still made it to work, and my car still brought me there... But I would have made it there anyway. Aint I great?

(04-21-2014 03:40 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 03:36 PM)UConnFB Wrote:  What is your argument exactly? UConn was wearing AAC patches. This is true. Were we "repping" the AAC. Yeah, OK. But the AAC had little to do with why UConn ended up where it did.

Just like my car had little to do with me getting to work today.

I would have walked if I didn't have my car.



There. That's the crux of your logic.

But, make no mistake, I still made it to work, and my car still brought me there... But I would have made it there anyway. Aint I great?

You're right. The decades of program building under Jim Calhoun and the staff that remains there had less to do with winning the championship than the AAC patches on the player's jerseys.

(04-21-2014 03:43 PM)UConnFB Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 03:40 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 03:36 PM)UConnFB Wrote:  What is your argument exactly? UConn was wearing AAC patches. This is true. Were we "repping" the AAC. Yeah, OK. But the AAC had little to do with why UConn ended up where it did.

Just like my car had little to do with me getting to work today.

I would have walked if I didn't have my car.



There. That's the crux of your logic.

But, make no mistake, I still made it to work, and my car still brought me there... But I would have made it there anyway. Aint I great?

You're right. The decades of program building under Jim Calhoun and the staff that remains there had less to do with winning the championship than the AAC patches on the player's jerseys.

That's all well and good.

But, this is the present. TEMPLE went to the dance for 6 straight years; but all of that program building didn't help the Owls fend off attrition issues this year.

Every year is its own capsule. Although, I sure wish we had Wyatt this year.

(04-21-2014 03:47 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 03:43 PM)UConnFB Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 03:40 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 03:36 PM)UConnFB Wrote:  What is your argument exactly? UConn was wearing AAC patches. This is true. Were we "repping" the AAC. Yeah, OK. But the AAC had little to do with why UConn ended up where it did.

Just like my car had little to do with me getting to work today.

I would have walked if I didn't have my car.



There. That's the crux of your logic.

But, make no mistake, I still made it to work, and my car still brought me there... But I would have made it there anyway. Aint I great?

You're right. The decades of program building under Jim Calhoun and the staff that remains there had less to do with winning the championship than the AAC patches on the player's jerseys.

That's all well and good.

But, this is the present. TEMPLE went to the dance for 6 straight years; but all of that program building didn't help the Owls fend off attrition issues this year.

Every year is its own capsule. Although, I sure wish we had Wyatt this year.

With all due respect to Temple, you're using anecdotal evidence to compare a program that has won 4 titles in 15 years to a program that has been to the tournament 6 years in a row? And you are saying the reason why Temple faltered is because of the pressure they faced in the AAC?

I would submit to you that they would have had a bad year in any conference. And they did have an uncharacteristically bad year.