(06-23-2019 02:52 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  With their decision making over the last 10-15 years, the UConn athletic dept and board has probably cost the university upwards of $300mm in revenue and brand equity. Maybe more. It’s worthy of a business paper.

Yeah, I’m sure this is going to be studied. Can’t help but think they and Boston serve as a good counterpoint to each other. To BU, it felt like it upgraded moving to Patriot, while giving them the ability to cut costs. UConn’s back where it started, and if it drops football to FCS, it will complete the loop.

Down here, the Augustinians on Lancaster Avenue are smugly saying “told you so” to the people who thought its football needed to be at FBS level. Once there’s some kind of true northeastern FBS conference, you might see some other schools dare to venture back out there. It’s still every man for themselves up here. And may be that way for a lifetime.

(06-23-2019 07:48 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  [quote='Kit-Cat' pid='16157758' dateline='1561273920']2) AAC has to go back to 12 because the rules state to have a championship game it requires everyone to play round robin which isn't possible with 11. /quote]

Incorrect. You can play round robin within divisions of 5 and 6.

I have long ago learned not to take any claims of "Kit-Kat" for granted without checking. Lessee how that works.
Small division, 4 games in division, for the number of conference games "G", that is 5*(G-4)=5G-20 interdivision games involving the small division teams.

Big division, 5 games in division, for the number of conference games "G", that is 6*(G-5)=6G-30 interdivision games involving the big division teams.

For balanced schedules, 6G-30=5G-20, therefore G=10. Now, that is not REALLY divisional play, that is just playing every school in a round robin with one bye school per week, but FORMALLY whichever schools you arbitrarily place in each division, you can have the two division champions play a CCG.

Without balanced schedules, you can do it easily enough ... for instance, big division plays a five game round robin, and 3 games against small division schools, a total of 18 interdivision games. Small division plays a four game round robin and 2 of them play 3 games against big division schools while the other three play 4 games against big division schools, a total of 18 interdivision games.

(06-23-2019 07:48 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 02:12 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  2) AAC has to go back to 12 because the rules state to have a championship game it requires everyone to play round robin which isn't possible with 11.

Incorrect. You can play round robin within divisions of 5 and 6.

I just looked it up in the NCAA legislative database.

It says that football divisions have to be balanced.

Therefore football championship game with 11 is a complete non starter.

(06-23-2019 07:48 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 02:12 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  2) AAC has to go back to 12 because the rules state to have a championship game it requires everyone to play round robin which isn't possible with 11.

Incorrect. You can play round robin within divisions of 5 and 6.

https://web3.ncaa.org/lsdbi/search/bylawView?id=40189

(06-23-2019 09:17 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 07:48 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 02:12 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  2) AAC has to go back to 12 because the rules state to have a championship game it requires everyone to play round robin which isn't possible with 11.

Incorrect. You can play round robin within divisions of 5 and 6.

I just looked it up in the NCAA legislative database.

It says that football divisions have to be balanced.

Therefore football championship game with 11 is a complete non starter.

You just get a waiver like the MAC did when they had 13.

(06-23-2019 08:39 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 07:48 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  [quote='Kit-Cat' pid='16157758' dateline='1561273920']2) AAC has to go back to 12 because the rules state to have a championship game it requires everyone to play round robin which isn't possible with 11. /quote]

Incorrect. You can play round robin within divisions of 5 and 6.

I have long ago learned not to take any claims of "Kit-Kat" for granted without checking. Lessee how that works.
Small division, 4 games in division, for the number of conference games "G", that is 5*(G-4)=5G-20 interdivision games involving the small division teams.

Big division, 5 games in division, for the number of conference games "G", that is 6*(G-5)=6G-30 interdivision games involving the big division teams.

For balanced schedules, 6G-30=5G-20, therefore G=10. Now, that is not REALLY divisional play, that is just playing every school in a round robin with one bye school per week, but FORMALLY whichever schools you arbitrarily place in each division, you can have the two division champions play a CCG.

Without balanced schedules, you can do it easily enough ... for instance, big division plays a five game round robin, and 3 games against small division schools, a total of 18 interdivision games. Small division plays a four game round robin and 2 of them play 3 games against big division schools while the other three play 4 games against big division schools, a total of 18 interdivision games.

Yes, this solution is what I've described.

(06-23-2019 09:20 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 07:48 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 02:12 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  2) AAC has to go back to 12 because the rules state to have a championship game it requires everyone to play round robin which isn't possible with 11.

Incorrect. You can play round robin within divisions of 5 and 6.

https://web3.ncaa.org/lsdbi/search/bylawView?id=40189

Thank you for linking to the rules that validate my point:

Quote:17.10.5.2.1 Bowl Subdivision. [FBS] In bowl subdivision football, the maximum number of football contests shall exclude the following: (Revised: 1/10/90, 11/1/07 effective 8/1/08, 10/28/10, 10/27/11 effective 4/1/12, Adopted: 8/2/12 effective 8/1/14, 1/15/16 effective 8/1/16)

...

(b) Conference Championship Game. One conference championship game:

(1) Between division champions of a conference that is divided into two divisions (as equally balanced in number as possible) and conducts round-robin, regular-season competition in each division; or

(2) Between the top two teams in the conference standings following full round-robin regular-season competition among all members of the conference.

I hope UCONN goes independent but C-USA would be smart to invite them.

(06-23-2019 09:25 AM)Chappy Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 09:17 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 07:48 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 02:12 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  2) AAC has to go back to 12 because the rules state to have a championship game it requires everyone to play round robin which isn't possible with 11.

Incorrect. You can play round robin within divisions of 5 and 6.

I just looked it up in the NCAA legislative database.

It says that football divisions have to be balanced.

Therefore football championship game with 11 is a complete non starter.

You just get a waiver like the MAC did when they had 13.

Although it doesn't really matter, I wonder if the MAC actually received a waiver or just wasn't penalized by the NCAA. In any case, the MAC did at least meet the requirement that existed at the time for 12+ teams for a CCG, which the ACC did not when seeking a waiver for a CCG after adding Miami and VT.

While there is no minimum number of teams required anymore for a CCG, letting the AAC also slide on the rules would give even more support for the ACC and any other P5 conferences that seek further deregulation of divisions and CCGs. I'm not sure the NCAA wants to continue down that road, although personally I think deregulation here is a fine idea.

(06-23-2019 09:41 AM)AuzGrams Wrote:  I hope UCONN goes independent but C-USA would be smart to invite them.

I don't know that UConn football is worth the trouble for CUSA or the Sun Belt. Maybe the MAC, but UConn may consider all these conferences beneath them, despite the general ineptitude of their FB program.

(06-22-2019 02:20 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(06-22-2019 12:52 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  If the AAC is smart and not emotional, they will let UConn football remain in the AAC.

Swallow the pride and do the smart thing.

UConn with this move is saying that they are a basketball school that also plays football and that the Big East is a better home for their valued basketball program's. Since football is not a priority for them, they need to move on to independence or drop down to FCS.

I don't agree. I believe UConn when they say by no means are they giving up on FBS. They know they cannot, because that would sink their ultimate goal, which is not the Big East, but a P5 conference. They will continue to invest in FBS as either a conference team or as an independent.

So I think if UConn makes this move it for be for two reasons. First, unhappiness with the new Aresco TV deal that strips them of their lucrative T3 rights, and also a longstanding internal desire to compete in hoops vs their traditional rivals.

The goal here is to make UConn more P5 ready by shoring up men's hoops, which has flagged in the AAC generally, and was looking at further degradation with the new Aresco deal that hurts their exposure.

But make no mistake, UConn has not taken their eye off the P5 prize, and that requires football at FBS level.

(06-23-2019 10:53 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-22-2019 02:20 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(06-22-2019 12:52 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  If the AAC is smart and not emotional, they will let UConn football remain in the AAC.

Swallow the pride and do the smart thing.

UConn with this move is saying that they are a basketball school that also plays football and that the Big East is a better home for their valued basketball program's. Since football is not a priority for them, they need to move on to independence or drop down to FCS.

I don't agree. I believe UConn when they say by no means are they giving up on FBS. They know they cannot, because that would sink their ultimate goal, which is not the Big East, but a P5 conference. They will continue to invest in FBS as either a conference team or as an independent.

So I think if UConn makes this move it for be for two reasons. First, unhappiness with the new Aresco TV deal that strips them of their lucrative T3 rights, and also a longstanding internal desire to compete in hoops vs their traditional rivals.

The goal here is to make UConn more P5 ready by shoring up men's hoops, which has flagged in the AAC generally, and was looking at further degradation with the new Aresco deal that hurts their exposure.

But make no mistake, UConn has not taken their eye off the P5 prize, and that requires football at FBS level.

This is where we need a Utube link to Sinatra singing "To Dream the Impossible Dream." The pursuit of a P5 position by UConn is Quixotic at best. Football is 80% of the qualification for that dream. It's over. They've been in the red trying to get there for too long. If they will accept the reality that they neither have the resources nor recruits locally to sustain it, and instead pursue what put them on the map in a big way, hoops, they can both maintain status and recruits for the regional sport and operate in the black doing it. Football makes no sense or cents for UConn.

(06-23-2019 09:17 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 07:48 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 02:12 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  2) AAC has to go back to 12 because the rules state to have a championship game it requires everyone to play round robin which isn't possible with 11.

Incorrect. You can play round robin within divisions of 5 and 6.

I just looked it up in the NCAA legislative database.

It says that football divisions have to be balanced.

Therefore football championship game with 11 is a complete non starter.

That’s not true. What the new rules states is that a conference can divide into two divisions which must be as equal “as possible” for purposes of a CCG.

Interesting. Reading from a few on Twitter (namely Frank) that believe UConn with its new affiliation will not only be able to surpass the $7 million annually from the AAC TV deal, but that the BE will also be getting a significant increase in its next Fox TV deal.

Wonder what the next TV deal will end up looking like with UConn now on aboard.

(06-23-2019 10:53 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-22-2019 02:20 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(06-22-2019 12:52 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  If the AAC is smart and not emotional, they will let UConn football remain in the AAC.

Swallow the pride and do the smart thing.

UConn with this move is saying that they are a basketball school that also plays football and that the Big East is a better home for their valued basketball program's. Since football is not a priority for them, they need to move on to independence or drop down to FCS.

I don't agree. I believe UConn when they say by no means are they giving up on FBS. They know they cannot, because that would sink their ultimate goal, which is not the Big East, but a P5 conference. They will continue to invest in FBS as either a conference team or as an independent.

So I think if UConn makes this move it for be for two reasons. First, unhappiness with the new Aresco TV deal that strips them of their lucrative T3 rights, and also a longstanding internal desire to compete in hoops vs their traditional rivals.

The goal here is to make UConn more P5 ready by shoring up men's hoops, which has flagged in the AAC generally, and was looking at further degradation with the new Aresco deal that hurts their exposure.

But make no mistake, UConn has not taken their eye off the P5 prize, and that requires football at FBS level.

However—it would appear that thier Tier 3 rights will now be owned by Fox. So—point number one doesn’t make a lot of sense—unless it was just a “let’s stick it to ESPN” move induced by wounded pride. They still won’t derive any income from those rights.

I think it just comes down to the basics. UConn fans really never embraced the far flung mish-mash that is the AAC. The AAC is filled with peer teams—but no rivals. The only commonality among AAC teams is a willingness to invest heavily in athletics. The UConn fans longed for games against regional teams they had history with. They wanted their rivals. They wanted their traditional MSG tournament. Ticket sales were flagging. Fan interst was in decline. In my opinion—-This move was about re-energizing and recapturing the interest of the ticket buying UConn fans before the damage became permanent.

(06-22-2019 12:51 PM)Mestophalies Wrote:  

(06-22-2019 12:47 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  If this happens, beyond any specific impacts on media, it will be an enormous blow to AAC pride and prestige, and a big boost to the Big East.

I'm not a huge AAC supporter but, how is losing a team that has become a bottom feeder a huge blow to the AAC's ego? You tend to lose me with your outlandish statements.

Prison yard rules. The pecking order is clearly established. Who can poach whom?

The Big Ten > ACC and XII, SEC > XII, PAC > XII. ACC, B1G, XII > BE, BE > AAC, AAC > CUSA, MAC. CUSA > Sun Belt > FCS.

"Bottom feeder" or not, it really doesn't matter.

(06-22-2019 12:52 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  If the AAC is smart and not emotional, they will let UConn football remain in the AAC.

Swallow the pride and do the smart thing.

Quo vastly overrates the value of UConn football, but he may have this one right.

Assuming that The Powers That Be are not cool with the AAC standing pat at 11:

Just because UConn as a Football Affiliate is disposable, while a new full member (who would reduce the average value of the conference) would not be. (Unless you can pull in Boise State or BYU.)

Options in order of preference, if they asked me:
1. Boise State or BYU or Army for football, with or without other sports.
2. Stand pat at 11, if The Powers That Be change or waive the CCG rule.
3. UConn as a football-only on a series of short term contracts
4. Whoever is next on Aresco's draft board--ODU, UAB, Rice, Georgia State, UMass, USM, Marshall, Northern Illinois, Buffalo.......

Sure, you don't want to keep living with your spouse after a divorce. But if you need a roommate, better your ex-spouse as a roommate than rushing into a bad marriage.

(06-22-2019 01:13 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-22-2019 01:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-22-2019 01:06 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-22-2019 01:01 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-22-2019 12:47 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  If this happens, beyond any specific impacts on media, it will be an enormous blow to AAC pride and prestige, and a big boost to the Big East.

1. It is why I said in the other thread that the AAC needs to wait 3 or 4 years when better additions may likely be available, or a partial merger of the AAC into a better brand conference is possible.

2. I think this move likely spells the demise of the UConn football program. They scaled it up in hopes of making a move up and if they return to a basketball only conference I think it goes away eventually.

Good points. But will the AAC be patient? Aresco seems to be quite emotional and his example has made the AAC an emotional, chip on shoulder conference.

They may not react rationally.

Quo, this may come as a surprise to you, but UConn leaving the AAC with what the last few seasons has been tepid basketball and a dumpster fire of football is an unexpected gift to the AAC and apparently ESPN sees it that way since it won't affect their current contract so the pie just got bigger for everyone else with about 9/11ths of a million in exit fees and one less share of the pie. Aresco and the conference have no reason to worry. They'll play Beverly Hillbillies and stand on the porch and wave bye. But they won't say, "Ya'll come back now, hear!"

For USF's sake, i hope you are correct about money.

But in terms of pride and prestige, it is a big blow to the AAC.

No, it isn't. UConn basketball has finished 8th and tied for 9th in the AAC the past 2 seasons, and not above 5th since they unexpectedly won the natty in 2014.

And their football program is arguably the worst in FBS, with not much sign of hope. It is a giant drag on AAC football, which brings in the lion's share of the new TV deal.

Not only that, UConn is far outside the AAC geographic footprint, and has culturally never been a good fit.

Pride and prestige need to leave home and get a paying job.

(06-23-2019 09:48 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 09:25 AM)Chappy Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 09:17 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 07:48 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 02:12 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  2) AAC has to go back to 12 because the rules state to have a championship game it requires everyone to play round robin which isn't possible with 11.

Incorrect. You can play round robin within divisions of 5 and 6.

I just looked it up in the NCAA legislative database.

It says that football divisions have to be balanced.

Therefore football championship game with 11 is a complete non starter.

You just get a waiver like the MAC did when they had 13.

Although it doesn't really matter, I wonder if the MAC actually received a waiver or just wasn't penalized by the NCAA. In any case, the MAC did at least meet the requirement that existed at the time for 12+ teams for a CCG, which the ACC did not when seeking a waiver for a CCG after adding Miami and VT.

While there is no minimum number of teams required anymore for a CCG, letting the AAC also slide on the rules would give even more support for the ACC and any other P5 conferences that seek further deregulation of divisions and CCGs. I'm not sure the NCAA wants to continue down that road, although personally I think deregulation here is a fine idea.

Your whole premise is off because the AAC can use finding a 12th as a way to damage the MWC further by taking Air Force or Colorado St which we be almost compelled to move because of the crappy MWC TV deal.

They would like their chops at lining up against Houston or Memphis on ABC.

AAC then gets into another time zone and then can bridge west for future defections instead of being stuck with picking through CUSA scraps.

(06-23-2019 07:02 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-22-2019 01:44 PM)seaking4steel Wrote:  

(06-22-2019 01:27 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  They won't be, as the Big East does not have football.

You can be a full member of a conference and field sports that your conference doesn't sponsor. App State is full member of the Sun Belt that plays wrestling in the SoCon because SB doesn't sponsor it. UConn is moving hoops and their other sports sponsored by the BE to that conference.

Sorry but as a former wrestler this makes me laugh.

What's funny about high stakes competitive intercollegiate WWE 2K19?