Ask, and you shall receive.
DMG in Tampa, Fla., writes: The Big East today is basketball, no football yet nobody calls it the AAC or American Athletic Conference but everyone keeps calling it the Big East. Is there a law or contract that says you all have to keep calling this football conference the Big East even though they have already re-named it the American Athletic Conference? I'm just amazed that this whole country, Government and Law and Business is exactly just like this. Such an easy change made extremely hard. Have ESPN just change the name to American Athletic Conference / AAC now and forever please...!!!
Andrea Adelson writes: If only I could wave my magic wand or click my heels three times and make it so. For all of you hollering at me in the mailbag to have the name changed on our blog page once and for all, let me just copy and paste the first line from the statement announcing the name change:
The current Big East Conference has announced that it will be renamed the American Athletic Conference and will rebrand as such across all platforms, associations and media at the conclusion of the 2012-13 sports seasons.
So, until the sports seasons conclude, this technically is still the Big East blog. I have asked my editors about a timetable for the name change, and they are working on it.
This is the last time I will answer questions about why the name has not been changed yet. I know you all have plenty more to ask!
Ryan in Cincinnati writes: Hi Andrea, With the disappointing Grant of Rights announcement from the ACC, do you think the UC's (UConn, Cincy) will push the AAC to receive revenue from outside the box sources like a conference wide sponsor to even the playing field? Ex. The American Athletic Conference brought to you by Bank of America.
Adelson: Highly doubtful. Commissioner Mike Aresco shot down that idea rather forcefully last month. I don't think the grant of rights changes much in terms of dollars and cents. The soon-to-be-renamed Big East was already way, way behind the ACC in terms of television contract dollars before the GOR announcement.
Mark in Boston writes: In your "Cincinnati, UConn stuck in place" column, you state that "Cincinnati and UConn... bring no real monetary value from a television rights perspective." I respectfully disagree. Did Louisville bring monetary value from a television rights perspective? They are the No. 48 market. Hartford-New Haven is the No. 30 market, not to mention the fact that Southwestern CT is not in the Hartford-New Haven market but is in the NYC (No. 1) market. So, I am guessing that a solid third of all UConn fans are in the NYC market, not to mention that UConn has more fans in the NYC market than Syracuse. Of all the remaining attractive candidates for the Power 5 conferences, UConn brings the most number of TV sets and fans.
Adelson: You just proved my point, Mark. The Big Ten already has the New York market with Rutgers. As for Louisville, the Cardinals were not added for the television dollars. They were added to fill Maryland's spot, and television was not much of a factor because of that. In regards to potential future Big Ten expansion, that league would be looking to add teams that ADD value. Tell me what value UConn adds from a TV perspective when New York already is locked down?
Ryan in Johnstown, Ohio, writes: What would you consider as a realistic bowl line up for the 11-12 members in the AAC for the 2014-2017 bowl cycle? Do you think all of the current bowls will stick with the AAC? What are the chances the AAC can pick up a bowl or two in its new footprint -- lets say the Liberty Bowl and/or a bowl in Texas?
Adelson: I do not think all the current bowl partners will remain in the lineup. The New Era Pinstripe Bowl and the Russell Athletic Bowl, based on several media reports, have talked to other leagues. I would not be surprised if both those were gone from the rotation. The Belk Bowl also is having discussions with other leagues. My guess is that the league will do whatever it takes to keep one of its Florida bowls (in this case, the Beef 'O' Brady's Bowl) and add one from Texas.
John in Milton, Fla., writes: Hi Andrea. I saw that Clint Trickett was talking about USF being his first choice to attend after transferring out of FSU. Matt Floyd and Aaron Munoz are from my neck of the woods in Florida and I want them to succeed so bad I can taste it. However, this news of Trickett has completely excited me! What kind of percentage do YOU think there is that he'll come on down to USF? If he does, do YOU think it makes USF better or that it really doesn't change anything about the program?
Adelson: First, let me say I have no idea what is Trickett's first choice, based on the media reports out there. He also reportedly has an interest in West Virginia and Auburn as well. I know he has connections with coach Willie Taggart, but the bottom line is he is going to go to the school that gives him the opportunity to start. Now. He certainly would have that chance in Tampa, as the competition goes on between Matt Floyd and Bobby Eveld. I actually went up to Florida State spring practice for a few days last month as part of my ACC duties, and I thought Trickett looked very polished. Nice arm, made all the throws. Would he make USF better? That is a great question, and one that is an unknown. I think it really all depends on how he does picking up the system. On paper, it looks like a good fit, but you never truly know until a player arrives on campus and starts going through practice.