The Bishin Cutter wrote:
Obviously you feel very strongly on the subject.
I just think what's going on at Temple really begs the question: when is a conference upgrade not really an upgrade?
To be fair to Temple, they are doing right by these kids by honoring the remainder of their scholarships, working on transfers, and are waiving the eligibility issues.
Maybe it's more of a change of direction....than a conference upgrade?
I don't know. When Temple entered the conference, the basketball schools were still a part of it, and that's a lot of what they really wanted. There's a rumor Temple agreed to partially subsidize Villanova's football upgrade as terms for full inclusion. There was also a lot more money on the table had no other schools walked away (UL, RU, SDSU, and BSU).
Maybe if Temple jumped today, it would be a change of direction. When they did, though, they certainly thought it was an upgrade. Boise State and SDSU definitely saw it as one, too, even if it meant leaving a pretty decent Mountain West. When too many chaser schools left, it no longer was, and they no longer were, either.
For UConn, it could be, though.
Outside of the AAC, I think the question should be posed to UMD and Rutgers. UMD has already expressed hope it can reinstate one or two of its programs, with the others still on the table. But, it's one thing to say
that and another to actually do
, especially when the timetable is in that nebulous 5-10 year future.