If (when) the B1G expands again, would you be fine w/UConn?

Submitted by DISCUSS Man on September 22nd, 2013 at 8:29 PM

After last night, being at the game, I think UConn could be a halfway decent program in the B1G. 

I would say last night was probably 60/40 UConn fans. 

They already have had more recent success than Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota and Purdue. As well as Rutgers and Maryland. They don't have the biggest stadium, but neither does northwestern and I think we can all agree they have a pretty damn good team after literally starting from nothing.

UConn has been this shitty and is this shitty because Randy Edsall skipped town at the perfect time and left Pasqualoni with pretty much nothing. 

UConn has a national championship in basketball this decade, a dynasty in women's basketball and a hockey program which would boost the new B1G hockey conference's numbers. And by talking to some alums at the game yesterday, UConn is making a big push to get into the AAU. 

It would also give East coast Michigan fans/alums more chances to see Michigan. 

Comments

CTAlum

September 22nd, 2013 at 8:34 PM ^

I would support it, but I am biased since I live in CT.  UConn needs out of the AAC.

 

Another thought . . . UConn would probably be in the upper half of the B1G academically.

 

Stadiums can grow if a league starts filling the stadium because of good games.

Don

September 22nd, 2013 at 9:20 PM ^

There are varying criteria and metrics for academic excellence, but FWIW UConn is not currently a member of the Association of American Universities (AAU), and the last time the conference admitted a school that wasn't an AAU member at the time of its admittance was MSU in 1950. Nebraska was a member of the AAU when it joined the conference in 2011, but shortly after joining it was booted from the AAU over a dispute over whether to count the UN-Omaha medical campus as part of UN overall.

This isn't to say that UConn couldn't be invited to join the AAU and then the BIG, but that would depend on its status as a research institution. It's also possible that the conference could abandon the AAU-membership status as an unstated membership requirement, but there's no evidence whatsoever that such a move would be made for a school like UConn.

My preferred new members for a 16-team conference would be Pitt and Missouri, but I know both are non-starters right now.

gopoohgo

September 22nd, 2013 at 9:37 PM ^

UConn is redundant from a footprint standpoint.

As you stated above, UConn isn't an AAU school.

Also, they are pretty far down the federal research funding list; 81st.  Nebraska is the lowest @ 100-something.  UConn MAY be above Indiana, but not sure how the IU-PU mix in Indianapolis is counted.  Every other B1G school has more fed research dollars than UConn.  UMich tops the list at #3

http://www.ctmirror.org/sites/default/files/documents/research%20uconn.pdf

If we goto 16 school megaconferences, I think somehow peeling off some of the ACC schools (UVa or UNC) would be ideal..

justingoblue

September 23rd, 2013 at 11:36 AM ^

being combined campuses that are the issues for IU's funding numbers, it's the medical school being its own entity in Indianapolis (and a small outpost in Fort Wayne). That's the biggest chunk of reseach dollars and a lot of metrics don't count those dollars for IU. If branch campuses are included with these figures, IUPUI's go with Indiana.

goblue20111

September 22nd, 2013 at 10:24 PM ^

it seems like a certain segment of this fan base would rather play/have Michigan play a certain brand of football and waddle in mediocrity so long as they play in said style of football rather than compete (and win) in modern realities of the game.  

Zone Left

September 22nd, 2013 at 11:13 PM ^

Maryland and Rutgers are somehow an improvement? Penn State hasn't exactly been elite either--and is the source of the biggest scandal in conference history.

What exactly has expansion done for the Big 10? Penn State helped bring money in, but that new money pays for really expensive softball and crew facilities, not football facilities. The money boom hasn't really changed football. It's just fueled a non-revenue sports building boom that I'm concerned about. Athletic departments are taking out huge loans fueled by low interest rates and TV money. I don't know that TV bundles will be here in a decade. Not like they are today. What happens then?

UCONN07

September 22nd, 2013 at 9:56 PM ^

First off, anyone thinking it was 60/40 UCONN to Michigan ratio in the stands last night had a couple too many in the parking lots. MAYBE 7,000 at the most. Not the so called 20-30,000 that many here were expecting.

Second, UCONN is a better school academics wise per the rankings than over half the Big Ten schools.

Third, as many BCS games as Michigan this decade, who honestly cares what a school did 20 years ago as if it matters in this day and age. SMU was good in the 80s, big whoop?

Can obviously compete in football and have been a better program than Minnesota, Northwestern, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana and Purdue over that last decade. 

Had more NFL draft picks in 2013 than any Big Ten school:

2013 NFL Draft Picks by College

 

Rank School Total
1 Florida State 11
2 Alabama 9
2 LSU 9
4 Florida 8
4 Georgia 8
6 Rutgers 7
6 South Carolina 7
8 Notre Dame 6
8 Oklahoma 6
10 Oregon 5
10 Texas A&M 5
10 UConn 5
10 UNC

Fourth, three men's national championships since 1999.

Fifth, women's basketball prominence.

Sixth, baseball, hockey success.

Seventh, TV markets.

Monocle Smile

September 22nd, 2013 at 10:50 PM ^

1) I was at the game and you MUST be tripping. 70-30 at the most conservative.

2) UConn is not an AAU member. That does count for something.

3) Bahahaha. For all the talk about Michigan not deserving a BCS bid, UConn as a team that year deserved it less. Big East weakness was the real factor. Furthermore, having more NFL draft picks last season doesn't make up for 5-7 and 2-5 in the goddamn Big East. This is pretty much Illinois every third year.

4) The only solid argument.

5) By the numbers, no one cares. No, I'm not making a judgment as to whether people should or should not.

6) See above.

7) You can't possibly be serious. Rutgers has already captured the few number of shits people give about college sports out here. I live an hour from Storrs and even the UConn alumni I work with often don't care.

M-Wolverine

September 23rd, 2013 at 10:45 AM ^

a 7-6 Michigan team hammered that BCS U-Conn team. They were not good. If it wasn't U-Conn it would have been someone else from an awful Big East that year. There's a reason they don't exist as a conference anymore. Not to mention Michigan has been to 4 in the last decade.  Unless he meant from 2011-12 which is what, one of two??

(And we'll never know how corrupt that basketball program was...but it didn't look so great at the end).

gopoohgo

September 22nd, 2013 at 11:41 PM ^

No.  UConn is rated 50-something in USNWR...that is NOT what the B1G presidents are looking at.

B1G presidents are looking at research $ and AAU membership.  And UConn is waay behind most of the B1G schools in that regard.

Sorry. Not ever going to happen.

BlueHills

September 22nd, 2013 at 11:50 PM ^

If there is to be conference expansion, I think UConn would make a fine addition. It's a good school. And let's face it, next year the B1G becomes a conference with an Eastern presence. Remember, we've also added Johns Hopkins as an associate member.

UConn's football program has generally been improving, basketball is excellent, and it has other cold weather sports we play.

I don't see how ACC schools like Ga. Tech are somehow more worthy acquisitions. What kind of hockey teams do they field? Where's the cultural fit? It'd be football-only. I realize the ACC turned down UConn. Their mistake, the way I see it. How is Louisville a better school?

And can you imagine dealing with a Texas with its crazy politics as part of the deal? There would be constant drama. Kansas? I see UConn as a better deal, though I'd be fine with Kansas or Oklahoma. Or Both. 

I dumped the Dope

September 22nd, 2013 at 8:47 PM ^

I know little to nothing of their academics...so...how that affects things I don't know.

My first thought related to football is they'd get run over by a LOT of B1G teams playing at their "traditional" levels of play.  But the revenue sharing (etc) might allow them to build up their game over several seasons, expand their stadium, get some field turf in there...

Mens BBall would continue to strengthen the B1G as a ruthlessly competitive conference, which I see as good.

I realize there's an undertone of conference strength in football after I just brought that up about basketball.  The usual old saw we've all heard about the B1G taking hits for not being an elite football conference, etc.  My thought on that is, until we start playing each other inter-conference games with presumed elite SE Conf, the only actual data is bowl games.  Home and home is where the true action is at in my mind.

ScruffyTheJanitor

September 22nd, 2013 at 8:47 PM ^

No to the idea of further expansion, no to UConn, and no to Rutgers and Maryland. I know its too late for those last two, but I will refuse to think of either game as a Big Ten game. They will be weighted out of conference games as far as I am concerned.