What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

dxmnkd316 said:
Um, what?

Northwestern, Michigan, UW, UMN, and even OSU are easily on par with washington and UCLA if not above them. Northwestern and Michigan specifically. USC is about on par with the top of the big ten academics. Stanford and Cal are probably above what the Big Ten can offer overall, but the PAC-10 doesn't have the CIC.

Texas may not give a flying **** about A&M, but the lawmakers in texas do. They wouldn't let the two be separated. And do you really think Texas would want to schedule OU and A&M as non-conference instead of two mediocre teams?
Click to expand...

My mistake I mean't to type Big 12. Freudian slip perhaps. Yes the Big 10 and the Pac 10 are on par academcially (along with the ACC I'd imagine). The academics issue might be an impediment to the other rumored move to the SEC.
 
Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

BoomGoestheDynamite said:
My mistake I mean't to type Big 12. Freudian slip perhaps. Yes the Big 10 and the Pac 10 are on par academcially (along with the ACC I'd imagine). The academics issue might be an impediment to the other rumored move to the SEC.
Click to expand...

Haha, I was just rereading your comment and it occurred to me that's probably what you meant :)

I agree. The SEC isn't even being considered at this point and has nothing to offer outside of football. The big ten probably holds the edge (over the PAC-10) if money and other sports are considered. Plus the time zone issue, which shouldn't be ignored. That being said, I don't think the big ten is willing to tack on all of the baggage that comes with expanding to 16 or whatever it would take to get texas.

As I said on GPL, A&M isn't exactly a bad prize to come with texas. A&M has a great fanbase and every now and then, they put together a good team. It's texas tech that becomes a problem. They are ok in athletics but I can't speak for their academics. I don't think the big ten is willing to compromise on a team that is subpar when it comes to academics. PAC-10 might, but I doubt that as well.
 
Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

dxmnkd316 said:
Haha, I was just rereading your comment and it occurred to me that's probably what you meant :)

I agree. The SEC isn't even being considered at this point and has nothing to offer outside of football. The big ten probably holds the edge (over the PAC-10) if money and other sports are considered. Plus the time zone issue, which shouldn't be ignored. That being said, I don't think the big ten is willing to tack on all of the baggage that comes with expanding to 16 or whatever it would take to get texas.

As I said on GPL, A&M isn't exactly a bad prize to come with texas. A&M has a great fanbase and every now and then, they put together a good team. It's texas tech that becomes a problem. They are ok in athletics but I can't speak for their academics. I don't think the big ten is willing to compromise on a team that is subpar when it comes to academics. PAC-10 might, but I doubt that as well.
Click to expand...

The Pac 10 currently has Oregon State and Wazzu, neither of which are known for setting the academic world on fire. While I can't imagine people in the Pac 10 are thrilled with having to swallow Ok State and Texas Tech (I'd imagine Utah and Kansas would replace these schools in a "dream" scenario) it might be considered a price worth paying.
 
Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

BoomGoestheDynamite said:
My mistake I mean't to type Big 12. Freudian slip perhaps. Yes the Big 10 and the Pac 10 are on par academcially (along with the ACC I'd imagine). The academics issue might be an impediment to the other rumored move to the SEC.
Click to expand...
Academics?? I thought this was all about the money.

Greed 14 Academics 3 end 1
 
Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

FYI, since it seems relevent to the conversation, if you think the US News and World Report rankings hold any water:

Big Ten:
Northwestern-12th
Michigan-27th
Illinois-39th
Wisconsin-39th
Penn State-47th
Ohio State-53rd
Purdue-61st
Minnesota-61st
Indiana-71st
Michigan State-71st
Iowa-71st

Pac-10:
Stanford-4th
Cal-21st
UCLA-24th
Southern Cal-26th
Washington-42nd
Arizona-102nd
Washingston State-104th
Oregon-115th
Arizona State-121st
Oregon State-Tier 3
 
Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

HumRsky said:
FYI, since it seems relevent to the conversation, if you think the US News and World Report rankings hold any water:
Click to expand...

I think any discussion about academics is silly... this is about sports money.
 
Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

Patman said:
I think any discussion about academics is silly... this is about sports money.
Click to expand...

When University Presidents make the decisions I think the academic quality of a school is important. The Pac 10's own bylaws require members to be major research institutions (and is the reason BYU was never really a viable option).
 
Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

Patman said:
I think any discussion about academics is silly... this is about sports money.
Click to expand...

No, it's not silly. Money is indeed the driver, but good academics are going to be a prerequisite for admission into either the Big Ten or Pac-10.

Don't forget that there's also a lot of money in academics - the Big Ten's academic connections can be extremely valuable for researchers at those respective schools. It remains to be seen how membership to that club will sort itself out, but it's certainly a large part of the discussion.
 
Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

blockski said:
No, it's not silly. Money is indeed the driver, but good academics are going to be a prerequisite for admission into either the Big Ten or Pac-10.

Don't forget that there's also a lot of money in academics - the Big Ten's academic connections can be extremely valuable for researchers at those respective schools. It remains to be seen how membership to that club will sort itself out, but it's certainly a large part of the discussion.
Click to expand...

From what I've been told such things don't really exist... and that being in the Big Ten doesn't, unto itself, foster further research.

Research isn't, and has never been, a driver in these conversations except for those that view such associations as validating their own existance and comfort amongst the faculty. In the end its a status symbol. I'm under the impression that there is no such animal as a Big Ten or Pac-10 consortium.

edit: if academics were the driver then why don't we ever see quotes from professors looking forward to these associations? The biggest driver is more belonging to a certain social class which presumes a flow of money... it is not and has never been about a research interconnection but rather prestige and resources available through prestige.
 
Last edited:
Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

Patman said:
From what I've been told such things don't really exist... and that being in the Big Ten doesn't, unto itself, foster further research.

Research isn't, and has never been, a driver in these conversations except for those that view such associations as validating their own existance and comfort amongst the faculty. In the end its a status symbol. I'm under the impression that there is no such animal as a Big Ten or Pac-10 consortium.

edit: if academics were the driver then why don't we ever see quotes from professors looking forward to these associations? The biggest driver is more belonging to a certain social class which presumes a flow of money... it is not and has never been about a research interconnection but rather prestige and resources available through prestige.
Click to expand...

As was mentioned before by TBA, read up on the original SWC collapse and Stanford's objection to Texas.

Also, google "CIC" and read up on that.

The reason we don't hear about academics in these discussions is because they aren't played out before a national audience on TV. But they will play a large role.
 
Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

Patman said:
From what I've been told such things don't really exist... and that being in the Big Ten doesn't, unto itself, foster further research.

Research isn't, and has never been, a driver in these conversations except for those that view such associations as validating their own existance and comfort amongst the faculty. In the end its a status symbol. I'm under the impression that there is no such animal as a Big Ten or Pac-10 consortium.

edit: if academics were the driver then why don't we ever see quotes from professors looking forward to these associations? The biggest driver is more belonging to a certain social class which presumes a flow of money... it is not and has never been about a research interconnection but rather prestige and resources available through prestige.
Click to expand...

You're putting words in my mouth - I never said academics was a "driver", I said it was a prerequisite.

And there is indeed such an academic consortium. The Committee on Institutional Cooperation, also known as the academic Big Ten - comprised of the current 11 members of the athletic conference, as well as one former and founding member, the University of Chicago.

Headquartered in the Midwest, the Committee on Institutional Cooperation (CIC) is a consortium of the Big Ten universities plus the University of Chicago. For half a century, these 12 world-class research institutions have advanced their academic missions, generated unique opportunities for students and faculty, and served the common good by sharing expertise, leveraging campus resources, and collaborating on innovative programs. Governed and funded by the Provosts of the member universities, CIC mandates are coordinated by a staff from its Champaign, Illinois headquarters.
Click to expand...

As far as "quotes from professors," this is about as close as you'll get: During one of the previous rounds of expansion (in 1999, I think), the Notre Dame Faculty Senate voted nearly unanimously in favor of joining the Big Ten - particularly because of the academic advantages offered by the CIC.
 
Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

Patman said:
Research isn't, and has never been, a driver in these conversations except for those that view such associations as validating their own existance and comfort amongst the faculty. In the end its a status symbol. I'm under the impression that there is no such animal as a Big Ten or Pac-10 consortium.
Click to expand...

May want to check a given universitiy's budget before really saying that. Many schools bring in more research dollars than athetic dollars.

For example, looking at Michgan- according to it, they bring in close to $700M in research money, whereas athletics total brings in less than $100M.

So IF research programs can be strenghtened by association, then it matters more than people think it does. A quick look at Research/Atheltic incomes of other "athletic" schools would tell you if it does or not.
 
Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

unofan said:
Do you completely ignore past postings about the CIC, or do you just not believe it actually exists?

http://board.uscho.com/showthread.php?p=4757706&highlight=CIC#post4757706

We mentioned this to you about 6 weeks ago.
Click to expand...

I missed it. I'll see if i remember it later to see what they do and then I'll revise. Believe it or not I don't stay 100% on top of every argument on the internet.

----

alfa... that may be true but in general, athletic affiliations don't enhance research and vice versa.

edit: to that, bringing in a new school is not often going to enhance current members.
 
Last edited:
Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

HumRsky said:
FYI, since it seems relevent to the conversation, if you think the US News and World Report rankings hold any water:

Big Ten:
Northwestern-12th
Michigan-27th
Illinois-39th
Wisconsin-39th
Penn State-47th
Ohio State-53rd
Purdue-61st
Minnesota-61st
Indiana-71st
Michigan State-71st
Iowa-71st

Pac-10:
Stanford-4th
Cal-21st
UCLA-24th
Southern Cal-26th
Washington-42nd
Arizona-102nd
Washingston State-104th
Oregon-115th
Arizona State-121st
Oregon State-Tier 3
Click to expand...

...and people were talking about schools fitting in conferences academically, so here is the Big 12 and Notre Dame:
Notre Dame-20th
Texas-47th
Texas A&M-61st
Colorado-77th
Baylor-80th
Iowa State-88th
Kansas-96th
Nebraska-96th
Missouri-102nd
Oklahoma-102nd
Kansas State, OK State and Texas Tech are all Tier 3
...and another school that has come up in Pac-10 dicussions, Utah, is 126th
 
Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

So, the Texas legislature is trying to force Baylor down the throat of another conference. The only way that's happening is if the PAC 10 changes from unanimous approval. Stanford choking down Texas Tech and Okie State because of the wads of money being waved in their face because of Texas is one thing, but approving a private Baptist college with Ken freaking Starr as their President?
 
Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

bronconick said:
So, the Texas legislature is trying to force Baylor down the throat of another conference. The only way that's happening is if the PAC 10 changes from unanimous approval. Stanford choking down Texas Tech and Okie State because of the wads of money being waved in their face because of Texas is one thing, but approving a private Baptist college with Ken freaking Starr as their President?
Click to expand...

Especially considering you'd be ditching the school that has the closest cultural links with the Pac-10. If Mizzou and Nebraska call it quits, I imagine A&M and UT have enough clout to tell the block forcing Baylor into the deal to suck it.

If the aforementioned move happens and the Pac 10 decides on a fall back minispansion of Colorado and Utah, the Texas schools are basically back in the Southwest Conference that imploded 15 years ago. Adding a TCU or a Houston is of no interest to the Aggies or Longhorns.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top