Notre Dame to ACC

All sports except football and hockey. Football remains an independent but will play five ACC games a year.

[www.nytimes.com]

nyc94
All sports except football and hockey. Football remains an independent but will play five ACC games a year.

[www.nytimes.com]

Most headlines (including on ESPN) just say all sports but Football. Can't wait to see that ACC hockey conference in action. Maybe they will adopt UAH. ::rolleye::

So ACC lacrosse will have Duke, UNC, UVA, Maryland, Syracuse, and Notre Dame?

French Rage
So ACC lacrosse will have Duke, UNC, UVA, Maryland, Syracuse, and Notre Dame?

Leaving the Big East with Georgetown and.... maybe a short lived conference?

Rita

nyc94
All sports except football and hockey. Football remains an independent but will play five ACC games a year.

[www.nytimes.com]

Most headlines (including on ESPN) just say all sports but Football.

I'm with the media on this one. They say "... to the ACC in all sports but football" BECAUSE the ACC isn't a hockey conference, so it is implied that the hockey team isn't going to the ACC.

The ACC and SEC schools playing hockey / club hockey, they have amazing pinup calendars.

French Rage
So ACC lacrosse will have Duke, UNC, UVA, Maryland, Syracuse, and Notre Dame?

Perhaps not.

nyc94

French Rage
So ACC lacrosse will have Duke, UNC, UVA, Maryland, Syracuse, and Notre Dame?

Perhaps not.

That's all anybody in Maryland is talking about this morning. The impression here is it's a done deal.

Which just revives (for the thousandth time) the 16-team super conference idea, only this time as multi-regional. Only a matter of time until the Big Ten poaches USC...

I realize that it's all about access to TV markets, but this Maryland business makes no sense. Rutgers does, in a way; Maryland doesn't.

It would be a bit of a stretch, considering the only recently better quality of its football team, but Temple would make far more sense than Maryland. (And, of course, before the ACC Megafee made it all but impossible, Syracuse or Pittsburgh would also make much more sense.)

Scersk '97
I realize that it's all about access to TV markets, but this Maryland business makes no sense. Rutgers does, in a way; Maryland doesn't.

The idea is to capture DC, but even then insofar as there is any interest in college football in DC and NoVa (which there isn't) it's VaTech.

Trotsky

Scersk '97
I realize that it's all about access to TV markets, but this Maryland business makes no sense. Rutgers does, in a way; Maryland doesn't.

The idea is to capture DC, but even then insofar as there is any interest in college football in DC and NoVa (which there isn't) it's VaTech.

I dont understand how the math works out to make these conferences so much more money. People in Philly, NYC (Rutger's media markets) and Baltimore, DC (Maryland's media markets) dont really care about those college sports outside of the alumni. It is different than the South or Midwest where non alumni identify with the school such as Alabama or Kansas. Plus the Big Ten network doesnt come with the standard tv package, it costs an extra $5 a month. Does adding these schools make it part of the standard package?

The stupid part about all this expansion is the destruction of great rivalries and turning every away game into a plane flight not only for the basketball,football teams but for the fans and all the non revenue sports

phillysportsfan

Trotsky

Scersk '97
I realize that it's all about access to TV markets, but this Maryland business makes no sense. Rutgers does, in a way; Maryland doesn't.

The idea is to capture DC, but even then insofar as there is any interest in college football in DC and NoVa (which there isn't) it's VaTech.

I dont understand how the math works out to make these conferences so much more money. People in Philly, NYC (Rutger's media markets) and Baltimore, DC (Maryland's media markets) dont really care about those college sports outside of the alumni. It is different than the South or Midwest where non alumni identify with the school such as Alabama or Kansas. Plus the Big Ten network doesnt come with the standard tv package, it costs an extra $5 a month. Does adding these schools make it part of the standard package?

The stupid part about all this expansion is the destruction of great rivalries and turning every away game into a plane flight not only for the basketball,football teams but for the fans and all the non revenue sports

I agree, but the AD's apparently don't. They dream of the day when the Big 10 will have as big a share of the NY & DC markets as it does in Chicago, Detroit, and Cleveland. Hope springs eternal.

phillysportsfan

Trotsky

Scersk '97
I realize that it's all about access to TV markets, but this Maryland business makes no sense. Rutgers does, in a way; Maryland doesn't.

The idea is to capture DC, but even then insofar as there is any interest in college football in DC and NoVa (which there isn't) it's VaTech.

I dont understand how the math works out to make these conferences so much more money. People in Philly, NYC (Rutger's media markets) and Baltimore, DC (Maryland's media markets) dont really care about those college sports outside of the alumni. It is different than the South or Midwest where non alumni identify with the school such as Alabama or Kansas. Plus the Big Ten network doesnt come with the standard tv package, it costs an extra $5 a month. Does adding these schools make it part of the standard package?

The stupid part about all this expansion is the destruction of great rivalries and turning every away game into a plane flight not only for the basketball,football teams but for the fans and all the non revenue sports

You're right about this being a boon to the airlines and about the loss of old rivalries. There's also the failure of basic math and geography. The Big Ten won't have 10 teams, just as the Big East or Atlantic Coast Conference may have a team from the Central or Mountain Time Zone. (Boise State, Big East.) But this may help create more fans in New York and Washington. Pre-Sandusky, a resident of the Northeast was happier with Penn State winning in football than Texas, with UConn winning in basketball than Kentucky. Now New Yorkers may (may) adopt Rutgers in football, DC residents Maryland.

Blame it all on ESPN, cable, and satellite. You can't fill all 500 channels with shopping (although QVC tries). Blame it also on colleges that say, "You need someone to play two time zones away on a Tuesday night for your Ten Days of Uninterrupted College Football? What's the guarantee?"

There definitely will be a smaller pool of Haves in football. If you're not in the SEC, Big Ten or Pac (?) Twelve, you may be overlooked.

billhoward
Blame it all on ESPN, cable, and satellite.

Blaming ESPN for our culture's mindless and suicidal greed is the equivalent of blaming Don Cherry for our culture's bad fashion sense.

billhoward
There definitely will be a smaller pool of Haves in football. If you're not in the SEC, Big Ten or Pac (?) Twelve, you may be overlooked.

How is this different from the way it is now?

Josh '99

billhoward
There definitely will be a smaller pool of Haves in football. If you're not in the SEC, Big Ten or Pac (?) Twelve, you may be overlooked.

How is this different from the way it is now?

You're right that it could just be more of the same. I believe however that the additional revenues from new super-conferences and TV let another half-dozen schools approach the $30 million Alabama spends on football and distance themselves from the poseurs in Conference USA, Mid-American Conference, Mountain West Conference, Sun Belt Conference, or WAC. Once you get beyond the top ten or twenty teams willing to get in a spending race (FBS has 120 schools), others are scrambling to keep up. Bloomberg reports Rutgers spent about $30M on all sports or about $1000 per student (some of which came out of the student fees). Will NJ keep those subsidies going? Every big school needs and probably has an indoor facility. Now you may have to have one 120 yards long. Ka-ching. If the coach recruits using a private plane, somebody else recruits in a twin turbo-prop, and then you need a small business jet.

A Big Ten network is also going to get Michigan and TOSU hockey on TV even more. That's one more thing we have to compete against. Fortunately, we can fight back with our worldwide Redcast network.

Is it Alabama? Texas? maybe all of them in FBS that have people hired to make sure each player gets up, gets to class, does homework, etcetera. I'm shocked that this doesn't sound like college.

billhoward

Josh '99

billhoward
There definitely will be a smaller pool of Haves in football. If you're not in the SEC, Big Ten or Pac (?) Twelve, you may be overlooked.

How is this different from the way it is now?

You're right that it could just be more of the same. I believe however that the additional revenues from new super-conferences and TV let another half-dozen schools approach the $30 million Alabama spends on football and distance themselves from the poseurs in Conference USA, Mid-American Conference, Mountain West Conference, Sun Belt Conference, or WAC. Once you get beyond the top ten or twenty teams willing to get in a spending race (FBS has 120 schools), others are scrambling to keep up. Bloomberg reports Rutgers spent about $30M on all sports or about $1000 per student (some of which came out of the student fees). Will NJ keep those subsidies going? Every big school needs and probably has an indoor facility. Now you may have to have one 120 yards long. Ka-ching. If the coach recruits using a private plane, somebody else recruits in a twin turbo-prop, and then you need a small business jet.

A Big Ten network is also going to get Michigan and TOSU hockey on TV even more. That's one more thing we have to compete against. Fortunately, we can fight back with our worldwide Redcast network.

Is it Alabama? Texas? maybe all of them in FBS that have people hired to make sure each player gets up, gets to class, does homework, etcetera. I'm shocked that this doesn't sound like college.

What? The way it's going to be is that if you aren't in the SEC, Big Ten, or Pac-12, you might be overlooked, because now more schools will have access the kind of revenue streams that the Alabamas and Texases spend on football? If that's the case, isn't that arguably better than the way it is now, because at least more schools will have that kind of revenue stream? Sure, it'll suck for CUSA and the MAC and the MWC (to say nothing of FBS/I-AA programs), but will it suck any more to have 30 schools operating on a fundamentally different playing field than the, say, 20 schools operating that way now? I don't see why that would be.

billhoward
There's also the failure of basic math and geography. The Big Ten won't have 10 teams

Basic math failed a long time ago. The Big Ten hasn't had 10 teams for over 20 years.

Hopefully it will all blow up in a few years when the projected revenue isnt there. Makes it even funnier that with their own TV network and all their money, Texas can still manage to get destryoed by D2 Chaminade

phillysportsfan
Hopefully it will all blow up in a few years when the projected revenue isnt there

Nate Silver, the FiveThirtyEight blogger who started out in sports statistics then called the 2008 and 2012 elections just about spot on, is back to sports. In Expansion by Big Ten May Bring Small Payoff, Nate Silver paints a mixed future for the expanded Big Ten beyond the increased NYC-DC based media attention.

Nate Silver, New York Times 11/21/12
Last year, I conducted an analysis of the 120 members of the N.C.A.A.’s Football Bowl Subdivision, attempting to estimate the number of fans devoted to each program. ... every college football fan in America was, in theory at least, mapped to his or her favorite team. ... Although New York is the nation’s largest media market, and although Rutgers is the most popular team in the New York City area, its over all numbers were just average by this method. That’s because only about 15 percent of New Yorkers are avid college football fans, among the lower figures in the country. ... Maryland ... is the predominant college football program in Maryland [but] the state has little passion for college football. And the program has little following outside Maryland’s immediate borders, where higher-profile teams like Virginia [Virginia football? -ed.], Virginia Tech, West Virginia and Penn State tend to dominate.

Rank Team              Estimated fans
1  The Ohio State U    3,167,263
2  Michigan            2,921,056
3  Penn State          2,642,275
32 Rutgers               937,874
58 Maryland              474,059

But that’s [Rutgers] below the Big Ten average of 1.4 million to 1.5 million fans per team. Programs like Wisconsin, which is close to the average with 1.4 million fans, might not seem to have as much media muscle. But these universities often have the affinity of whole states unto themselves, states where college football is a religion on Saturdays rather than an afterthought.

Rutgers and Maryland are outstanding public universities, but they are just not in the same league in terms of football. The Big Ten may have expanded its revenue pie, but it will be dividing it 14 ways rather than 12, and among family members that have less history of sitting down at the table with one another. [Silver also notes traditional Big Ten-to-Rutgers/Maryland games involve 10+ drives for for fans.] In seeking to expand its footprint eastward, the conference may have taken a step in the wrong direction.

billhoward
Nate Silver, the FiveThirtyEight blogger who started out in sports statistics then called the 2008 and 2012 elections just about spot on, is back to sports. In Expansion by Big Ten May Bring Small Payoff, Nate Silver paints a mixed future for the expanded Big Ten beyond the increased NYC-DC based media attention.

Nate Silver, New York Times 11/21/12
Last year, I conducted an analysis of the 120 members of the N.C.A.A.’s Football Bowl Subdivision, attempting to estimate the number of fans devoted to each program. ... every college football fan in America was, in theory at least, mapped to his or her favorite team. ... Although New York is the nation’s largest media market, and although Rutgers is the most popular team in the New York City area, its over all numbers were just average by this method. That’s because only about 15 percent of New Yorkers are avid college football fans, among the lower figures in the country. ... Maryland ... is the predominant college football program in Maryland [but] the state has little passion for college football. And the program has little following outside Maryland’s immediate borders, where higher-profile teams like Virginia [Virginia football? -ed.], Virginia Tech, West Virginia and Penn State tend to dominate.

Rank Team              Estimated fans
1  The Ohio State U    3,167,263
2  Michigan            2,921,056
3  Penn State          2,642,275
32 Rutgers               937,874
58 Maryland              474,059

But that’s [Rutgers] below the Big Ten average of 1.4 million to 1.5 million fans per team. Programs like Wisconsin, which is close to the average with 1.4 million fans, might not seem to have as much media muscle. But these universities often have the affinity of whole states unto themselves, states where college football is a religion on Saturdays rather than an afterthought.

Rutgers and Maryland are outstanding public universities, but they are just not in the same league in terms of football. The Big Ten may have expanded its revenue pie, but it will be dividing it 14 ways rather than 12, and among family members that have less history of sitting down at the table with one another. [Silver also notes traditional Big Ten-to-Rutgers/Maryland games involve 10+ drives for for fans.] In seeking to expand its footprint eastward, the conference may have taken a step in the wrong direction.

I read this too and thought that Silver is pretty close to being spot on. Can you say "irrational exuberence" boys and girls?

Then again, can you say, "The AD gets all the credit for the coup, gets a job offer higher up the food chain, and moves on before the chickens come home to roost?" In bubbles those who get in and out early still come away with a pretty penny.

I'm not sure the bubble analogy applies because the AD's and schools with the most to lose are those whose revenues will be diluted by expanding to weaker markets. Obviously the Big 10 is hoping to transform the NY & DC markets, but if the markets stay the same, the other schools will get a lower per-capita share of revenue. (Maybe there's a clause for new member schools that adjusts for this.) Maybe they think Rutgers and Maryland will now have a recruiting advantage, which will translate into higher rankings, which will translate into higher ratings, which will translate into $$. We'll see.

It's just too bad that tradition and culture is being wrecked by this speculative chasing of big bucks.

billhoward
Nate Silver, the FiveThirtyEight blogger who started out in sports statistics then called the 2008 and 2012 elections just about spot on, is back to sports. In Expansion by Big Ten May Bring Small Payoff, Nate Silver paints a mixed future for the expanded Big Ten beyond the increased NYC-DC based media attention.

Nate Silver, New York Times 11/21/12
Last year, I conducted an analysis of the 120 members of the N.C.A.A.’s Football Bowl Subdivision, attempting to estimate the number of fans devoted to each program. ... every college football fan in America was, in theory at least, mapped to his or her favorite team. ... Although New York is the nation’s largest media market, and although Rutgers is the most popular team in the New York City area, its over all numbers were just average by this method. That’s because only about 15 percent of New Yorkers are avid college football fans, among the lower figures in the country. ... Maryland ... is the predominant college football program in Maryland [but] the state has little passion for college football. And the program has little following outside Maryland’s immediate borders, where higher-profile teams like Virginia [Virginia football? -ed.], Virginia Tech, West Virginia and Penn State tend to dominate.

Rank Team              Estimated fans
1  The Ohio State U    3,167,263
2  Michigan            2,921,056
3  Penn State          2,642,275
32 Rutgers               937,874
58 Maryland              474,059

But that’s [Rutgers] below the Big Ten average of 1.4 million to 1.5 million fans per team. Programs like Wisconsin, which is close to the average with 1.4 million fans, might not seem to have as much media muscle. But these universities often have the affinity of whole states unto themselves, states where college football is a religion on Saturdays rather than an afterthought.

Rutgers and Maryland are outstanding public universities, but they are just not in the same league in terms of football. The Big Ten may have expanded its revenue pie, but it will be dividing it 14 ways rather than 12, and among family members that have less history of sitting down at the table with one another. [Silver also notes traditional Big Ten-to-Rutgers/Maryland games involve 10+ drives for for fans.] In seeking to expand its footprint eastward, the conference may have taken a step in the wrong direction.

The hope, I would assume, is that Rutgers draws a bandwagon by virtue of improved public perception of the quality of the team because of being in a bigger conference and playing higher-profile opponents. It's worth noting that, per Silver's original piece from last fall, despite only being part of the national conversation for the past ~10 years, Rutgers had the second-biggest pure numerical following in the Big East (and was almost on par with West Virginia for the biggest) just by virtue of having their small share be cut from a huge pie. If they were to just grow their fan base to encompass a slightly larger share of the people in New York market who are already NCAA football fans (25% rather than 20%, say), their fan base gets up with Iowa and Nebraska and Michigan State, which seems like a perfectly achievable and acceptable baseline. But thinking bigger, even if they never have the penetration into the general public that Silver mentions for Nebraska (36.4% of the population of the Omaha media market), even 5% of the NYC media market general public rather than the current 3% puts them in the same ballpark as Wisconsin, if not the big three of Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State. You also get greater engagement with the UM/OSU/PSU fans in the NYC market, which presumably is worth something, though I don't have any idea how to quantify it.

I think Silver also maybe neglects to consider, by focusing on Rutgers' engagement in the NYC media market, that Philadelphia is the fourth-largest media market in the country, and a solid third of that market is in Central and South Jersey. With New Brunswick being a good deal closer to Philadelphia than State College is, and with the Penn State football program in a bit of a strange place these days, I think they're going for a bigger share of (for Rutgers), and stronger hold on (for the Big Ten), that market as well. Both NYC and Philly are generally though of as pro sports markets rather than college sports markets (Silver's numbers show that 14% of the NYC-area population and 20% of the Philly-area population follow NCAA football, as compared with 41% in Atlanta, 27% in Dallas, and 28% in Houston), but there's no inherent reason that it must always be that way.

Edit to add: All that being said, Silver is almost always right and it's no guarantee that this move will work out for any of the parties involved. I just don't think it needs all that much of a change in people's attitudes for it to be worthwhile. And I say that as someone who doesn't like this move because I don't think Rutgers belongs in a conference with Big Midwestern Sports Factory State University.

I think the conference's play here is to get the Big 10 Network picked up by the NY Metro and DC Metro cable carriers. I don't think they think there is a silent but fervent Rutgers or Maryland fanbase. Instead, I think that they hope to get the network carried in the important markets which carries its own financial reward. Then, if the local coverage of Rutgers and Maryland lead to increased interest in actual Rutgers and Maryland football, even better.

As for the schools, Rutgers is escaping a sinking ship; Maryland is trading basketball for football. I'm more skeptical about Maryland's decision.

ugarte
I think the conference's play here is to get the Big 10 Network picked up by the NY Metro and DC Metro cable carriers. I don't think they think there is a silent but fervent Rutgers or Maryland fanbase. Instead, I think that they hope to get the network carried in the important markets which carries its own financial reward. Then, if the local coverage of Rutgers and Maryland lead to increased interest in actual Rutgers and Maryland football, even better.

As for the schools, Rutgers is escaping a sinking ship; Maryland is trading basketball for football. I'm more skeptical about Maryland's decision.

Are you sure Maryland is trading away on basketball? I don't know how much the Big Ten gets from basketball, but it's significant. And in basketball they were never going to break thru the Carolina schools, but may have a better chance with the switch. That said, I'm very unhappy with what is going on in big time sports. One wonders what might have happened if SU and PSU could have settled their differences, way bck when, and that a true eastern (really northeastern) sports league had been formed all those years ago.

Jim Hyla

ugarte
I think the conference's play here is to get the Big 10 Network picked up by the NY Metro and DC Metro cable carriers. I don't think they think there is a silent but fervent Rutgers or Maryland fanbase. Instead, I think that they hope to get the network carried in the important markets which carries its own financial reward. Then, if the local coverage of Rutgers and Maryland lead to increased interest in actual Rutgers and Maryland football, even better.

As for the schools, Rutgers is escaping a sinking ship; Maryland is trading basketball for football. I'm more skeptical about Maryland's decision.

Are you sure Maryland is trading away on basketball? I don't know how much the Big Ten gets from basketball, but it's significant. And in basketball they were never going to break thru the Carolina schools, but may have a better chance with the switch. That said, I'm very unhappy with what is going on in big time sports. One wonders what might have happened if SU and PSU could have settled their differences, way bck when, and that a true eastern (really northeastern) sports league had been formed all those years ago.

Oh, the Big 10 is a good basketball conference too, but Maryland is throwing away the regional rivalries and the BEST basketball conference (in intensity, even in the years when it isn't the best talent).

Can't be far off. We're now looking at 5 Big Ten lax schools:
Rutgers
Maryland
Penn State
Ohio State
Michigan

Six forces a conference (see men's hockey). Northwestern already dominates women's lax....

The women are at five too:
Rutgers
Maryland
Penn State
Ohio State
Northwestern

ACC votes to add Louisville and sues Maryland to get the full $50 million exit fee.

[espn.go.com]

nyc94
ACC votes to add Louisville and sues Maryland to get the full $50 million exit fee.

[espn.go.com]

Brett McMurphy (ESPN)
The ACC also considered UConn and Cincinnati for membership. However, sources told ESPN the league only wanted Louisville because there is a sense among league presidents that the ACC can add more schools at a later date if the ACC lost any other schools.

Makes absolutely no sense. The question is why Louisville over UConn or Cincinnati now.

Swampy

nyc94
ACC votes to add Louisville and sues Maryland to get the full $50 million exit fee.

[espn.go.com]

Brett McMurphy (ESPN)
The ACC also considered UConn and Cincinnati for membership. However, sources told ESPN the league only wanted Louisville because there is a sense among league presidents that the ACC can add more schools at a later date if the ACC lost any other schools.

Makes absolutely no sense. The question is why Louisville over UConn or Cincinnati now.

Geography.

ugarte

Swampy

nyc94
ACC votes to add Louisville and sues Maryland to get the full $50 million exit fee.

[espn.go.com]

Brett McMurphy (ESPN)
The ACC also considered UConn and Cincinnati for membership. However, sources told ESPN the league only wanted Louisville because there is a sense among league presidents that the ACC can add more schools at a later date if the ACC lost any other schools.

Makes absolutely no sense. The question is why Louisville over UConn or Cincinnati now.

Geography.

But they're already adding Syracuse and Pittsburgh and have Boston College. Are either UConn or Cincinnati really much of a stretch geographically? They are certainly better geographic fits than Maryland is with the Big 10 and San Diego State is with the Big East.

jtn27

ugarte

Swampy

nyc94
ACC votes to add Louisville and sues Maryland to get the full $50 million exit fee.

[espn.go.com]

Brett McMurphy (ESPN)
The ACC also considered UConn and Cincinnati for membership. However, sources told ESPN the league only wanted Louisville because there is a sense among league presidents that the ACC can add more schools at a later date if the ACC lost any other schools.

Makes absolutely no sense. The question is why Louisville over UConn or Cincinnati now.

Geography.

But they're already adding Syracuse and Pittsburgh and have Boston College. Are either UConn or Cincinnati really much of a stretch geographically? They are certainly better geographic fits than Maryland is with the Big 10 and San Diego State is with the Big East.

I think the name of the game these days is to be as far-flung geographically as possible to try to attract more of a national audience.

I just love how the Presidents and Trustees of these Universities are setting such a fine example of honesty and integrity

scoop85
I just love how the Presidents and Trustees of these Universities are setting such a fine example of honesty and integrity

I'm Shocked! Shocked!

Swampy

nyc94
ACC votes to add Louisville and sues Maryland to get the full $50 million exit fee.

[espn.go.com]

Brett McMurphy (ESPN)
The ACC also considered UConn and Cincinnati for membership. However, sources told ESPN the league only wanted Louisville because there is a sense among league presidents that the ACC can add more schools at a later date if the ACC lost any other schools.

Makes absolutely no sense. The question is why Louisville over UConn or Cincinnati now.

Seems like a clear indication that Louisville was their top choice of the three, but you're right that there's no indication of why. What the guy from ESPN provides is a reason why they added one school rather than three, not a reason why they added Louisville rather than UConn or Cincinnati.

It's surprising to me that they wouldn't jump at the chance to add a basketball powerhouse like UConn, although of course Louisville does have some track record there as well, at least on the men's side. I guess the lure of having a venue with a name like the KFC Yum! Center was just too hard to resist.

Josh '99

Swampy

nyc94
ACC votes to add Louisville and sues Maryland to get the full $50 million exit fee.

[espn.go.com]

Brett McMurphy (ESPN)
The ACC also considered UConn and Cincinnati for membership. However, sources told ESPN the league only wanted Louisville because there is a sense among league presidents that the ACC can add more schools at a later date if the ACC lost any other schools.

Makes absolutely no sense. The question is why Louisville over UConn or Cincinnati now.

Seems like a clear indication that Louisville was their top choice of the three, but you're right that there's no indication of why. What the guy from ESPN provides is a reason why they added one school rather than three, not a reason why they added Louisville rather than UConn or Cincinnati.

It's surprising to me that they wouldn't jump at the chance to add a basketball powerhouse like UConn, although of course Louisville does have some track record there as well, at least on the men's side. I guess the lure of having a venue with a name like the KFC Yum! Center was just too hard to resist.

Maybe the ACC is still pissed about getting sued by... UConn... ten years ago when BC left?

Josh '99

Swampy

nyc94
ACC votes to add Louisville and sues Maryland to get the full $50 million exit fee.

[espn.go.com]

Brett McMurphy (ESPN)
The ACC also considered UConn and Cincinnati for membership. However, sources told ESPN the league only wanted Louisville because there is a sense among league presidents that the ACC can add more schools at a later date if the ACC lost any other schools.

Makes absolutely no sense. The question is why Louisville over UConn or Cincinnati now.

Seems like a clear indication that Louisville was their top choice of the three, but you're right that there's no indication of why. What the guy from ESPN provides is a reason why they added one school rather than three, not a reason why they added Louisville rather than UConn or Cincinnati.

It's surprising to me that they wouldn't jump at the chance to add a basketball powerhouse like UConn, although of course Louisville does have some track record there as well, at least on the men's side. I guess the lure of having a venue with a name like the KFC Yum! Center was just too hard to resist.

Or maybe they looked at their respective programs, the markets they are in, and decided Louisville had more to offer. Certainly UConn football doesn't yet add that much, Louisville seems to add more in that way. Men's basketball is at best a tradeoff as far as UConn is concerned. Yes, they have a great history, but L'ville isn't that far, if at all, behind. With the coaching situation at L'ville being secure, and UConn somewhat unknown, I think the edge also goes to L'ville here. Everything else, including UConn's women's basketball, just doesn't matter. Looking at the market, TV that is, I don't know that UConn brings that much. Others know better than I, but BC probably is a stronger NE draw, and does UConn draw a substantial part of the NYC market? If not, then extending into the edge of the Big Ten and SEC market could help.

UConn only draws interest in NYC from people who moved from Connecticut to the city.

ugarte
UConn only draws interest in NYC from people who moved from Connecticut to the city.

And SNY has a contract to show UConn football and both Men's and Women's basketball.

[www.nbcconnecticut.com]

Jim Hyla

Josh '99

Swampy

nyc94
ACC votes to add Louisville and sues Maryland to get the full $50 million exit fee.

[espn.go.com]

Brett McMurphy (ESPN)
The ACC also considered UConn and Cincinnati for membership. However, sources told ESPN the league only wanted Louisville because there is a sense among league presidents that the ACC can add more schools at a later date if the ACC lost any other schools.

Makes absolutely no sense. The question is why Louisville over UConn or Cincinnati now.

Seems like a clear indication that Louisville was their top choice of the three, but you're right that there's no indication of why. What the guy from ESPN provides is a reason why they added one school rather than three, not a reason why they added Louisville rather than UConn or Cincinnati.

It's surprising to me that they wouldn't jump at the chance to add a basketball powerhouse like UConn, although of course Louisville does have some track record there as well, at least on the men's side. I guess the lure of having a venue with a name like the KFC Yum! Center was just too hard to resist.

Or maybe they looked at their respective programs, the markets they are in, and decided Louisville had more to offer. Certainly UConn football doesn't yet add that much, Louisville seems to add more in that way. Men's basketball is at best a tradeoff as far as UConn is concerned. Yes, they have a great history, but L'ville isn't that far, if at all, behind. With the coaching situation at L'ville being secure, and UConn somewhat unknown, I think the edge also goes to L'ville here. Everything else, including UConn's women's basketball, just doesn't matter. Looking at the market, TV that is, I don't know that UConn brings that much. Others know better than I, but BC probably is a stronger NE draw, and does UConn draw a substantial part of the NYC market? If not, then extending into the edge of the Big Ten and SEC market could help.

L'ville was supposedly very close to being chosen for the Big 12 last year and folks here in WV had talked about their inclusion being a given if the league found a suitable 12th. UConn was seen as a bridge too far for the league and there was no real interest in Cincy. So, they are likely available down the road if necessary while there was a greater chance the Cardinals would be gone. L'ville is also a safer bet in hoops as there is no real guarantee UConn will be the same without Calhoun (they weren't relevant before him) while Louisville has a much longer history. Finally, the seems to be some really bad blood between UConn and BC. Can't imagine the Eagles have that much sway, but sometimes it's easier to just get along.

As a WV native and Mountaineer fan from before I knew there was a Cornell, it's kind of sad watching the demise of all the rivalries I knew as a kid.

RichH

ugarte
UConn only draws interest in NYC from people who moved from Connecticut to the city.

And SNY has a contract to show UConn football and both Men's and Women's basketball.

[www.nbcconnecticut.com]

Does anyone actually watch SNY when they're not showing a Mets game? (Same goes for the Yankees and YES).

jtn27

RichH

ugarte
UConn only draws interest in NYC from people who moved from Connecticut to the city.

And SNY has a contract to show UConn football and both Men's and Women's basketball.

[www.nbcconnecticut.com]

Does anyone actually watch SNY when they're not showing a Mets game? (Same goes for the Yankees and YES).

Sometimes I watch YES. Sometimes you just can't deny the appeal of Yankeeography: Shane Spencer.

Chris '03

Josh '99

Swampy

nyc94
ACC votes to add Louisville and sues Maryland to get the full $50 million exit fee.

[espn.go.com]

Brett McMurphy (ESPN)
The ACC also considered UConn and Cincinnati for membership. However, sources told ESPN the league only wanted Louisville because there is a sense among league presidents that the ACC can add more schools at a later date if the ACC lost any other schools.

Makes absolutely no sense. The question is why Louisville over UConn or Cincinnati now.

Seems like a clear indication that Louisville was their top choice of the three, but you're right that there's no indication of why. What the guy from ESPN provides is a reason why they added one school rather than three, not a reason why they added Louisville rather than UConn or Cincinnati.

It's surprising to me that they wouldn't jump at the chance to add a basketball powerhouse like UConn, although of course Louisville does have some track record there as well, at least on the men's side. I guess the lure of having a venue with a name like the KFC Yum! Center was just too hard to resist.

Maybe the ACC is still pissed about getting sued by... UConn... ten years ago when BC left?

Wow, completely forgot about that.

mountainred
... there is no real guarantee UConn will be the same without Calhoun (they weren't relevant before him).

Oooh. Excellent point.

mountainred

Jim Hyla

Josh '99

Swampy

nyc94
ACC votes to add Louisville and sues Maryland to get the full $50 million exit fee.

[espn.go.com]

Brett McMurphy (ESPN)
The ACC also considered UConn and Cincinnati for membership. However, sources told ESPN the league only wanted Louisville because there is a sense among league presidents that the ACC can add more schools at a later date if the ACC lost any other schools.

Makes absolutely no sense. The question is why Louisville over UConn or Cincinnati now.

Seems like a clear indication that Louisville was their top choice of the three, but you're right that there's no indication of why. What the guy from ESPN provides is a reason why they added one school rather than three, not a reason why they added Louisville rather than UConn or Cincinnati.

It's surprising to me that they wouldn't jump at the chance to add a basketball powerhouse like UConn, although of course Louisville does have some track record there as well, at least on the men's side. I guess the lure of having a venue with a name like the KFC Yum! Center was just too hard to resist.

Or maybe they looked at their respective programs, the markets they are in, and decided Louisville had more to offer. Certainly UConn football doesn't yet add that much, Louisville seems to add more in that way. Men's basketball is at best a tradeoff as far as UConn is concerned. Yes, they have a great history, but L'ville isn't that far, if at all, behind. With the coaching situation at L'ville being secure, and UConn somewhat unknown, I think the edge also goes to L'ville here. Everything else, including UConn's women's basketball, just doesn't matter. Looking at the market, TV that is, I don't know that UConn brings that much. Others know better than I, but BC probably is a stronger NE draw, and does UConn draw a substantial part of the NYC market? If not, then extending into the edge of the Big Ten and SEC market could help.

L'ville was supposedly very close to being chosen for the Big 12 last year and folks here in WV had talked about their inclusion being a given if the league found a suitable 12th. UConn was seen as a bridge too far for the league and there was no real interest in Cincy. So, they are likely available down the road if necessary while there was a greater chance the Cardinals would be gone. L'ville is also a safer bet in hoops as there is no real guarantee UConn will be the same without Calhoun (they weren't relevant before him) while Louisville has a much longer history. Finally, the seems to be some really bad blood between UConn and BC. Can't imagine the Eagles have that much sway, but sometimes it's easier to just get along.

As a WV native and Mountaineer fan from before I knew there was a Cornell, it's kind of sad watching the demise of all the rivalries I knew as a kid.

Thinking a bit more about it here are two more hypotheses. (1) The really, really big money is in football, and neither UConn nor Cincy really move the needle on that score. (2) With the Big East a shadow of its former self, UConn is going to have more difficulty recruiting for B-Ball; so with Calhoun gone, UConn's fortunes may be about to tank.

Swampy

mountainred

Jim Hyla

Josh '99

Swampy

nyc94
ACC votes to add Louisville and sues Maryland to get the full $50 million exit fee.

[espn.go.com]

Brett McMurphy (ESPN)
The ACC also considered UConn and Cincinnati for membership. However, sources told ESPN the league only wanted Louisville because there is a sense among league presidents that the ACC can add more schools at a later date if the ACC lost any other schools.

Makes absolutely no sense. The question is why Louisville over UConn or Cincinnati now.

Seems like a clear indication that Louisville was their top choice of the three, but you're right that there's no indication of why. What the guy from ESPN provides is a reason why they added one school rather than three, not a reason why they added Louisville rather than UConn or Cincinnati.

It's surprising to me that they wouldn't jump at the chance to add a basketball powerhouse like UConn, although of course Louisville does have some track record there as well, at least on the men's side. I guess the lure of having a venue with a name like the KFC Yum! Center was just too hard to resist.

Or maybe they looked at their respective programs, the markets they are in, and decided Louisville had more to offer. Certainly UConn football doesn't yet add that much, Louisville seems to add more in that way. Men's basketball is at best a tradeoff as far as UConn is concerned. Yes, they have a great history, but L'ville isn't that far, if at all, behind. With the coaching situation at L'ville being secure, and UConn somewhat unknown, I think the edge also goes to L'ville here. Everything else, including UConn's women's basketball, just doesn't matter. Looking at the market, TV that is, I don't know that UConn brings that much. Others know better than I, but BC probably is a stronger NE draw, and does UConn draw a substantial part of the NYC market? If not, then extending into the edge of the Big Ten and SEC market could help.

L'ville was supposedly very close to being chosen for the Big 12 last year and folks here in WV had talked about their inclusion being a given if the league found a suitable 12th. UConn was seen as a bridge too far for the league and there was no real interest in Cincy. So, they are likely available down the road if necessary while there was a greater chance the Cardinals would be gone. L'ville is also a safer bet in hoops as there is no real guarantee UConn will be the same without Calhoun (they weren't relevant before him) while Louisville has a much longer history. Finally, the seems to be some really bad blood between UConn and BC. Can't imagine the Eagles have that much sway, but sometimes it's easier to just get along.

As a WV native and Mountaineer fan from before I knew there was a Cornell, it's kind of sad watching the demise of all the rivalries I knew as a kid.

Thinking a bit more about it here are two more hypotheses. (1) The really, really big money is in football, and neither UConn nor Cincy really move the needle on that score. (2) With the Big East a shadow of its former self, UConn is going to have more difficulty recruiting for B-Ball; so with Calhoun gone, UConn's fortunes may be about to tank.

It's interesting to observe institutions that seem to tie academic performance to athletic success. I saw a rising slope when I lived in Blacksburg, VA and if everybody is right, I'm about to see the falling slope here in CT. [www.theuconnblog.com]

Swampy

mountainred

Jim Hyla

Josh '99

Swampy

nyc94
ACC votes to add Louisville and sues Maryland to get the full $50 million exit fee.

[espn.go.com]

Brett McMurphy (ESPN)
The ACC also considered UConn and Cincinnati for membership. However, sources told ESPN the league only wanted Louisville because there is a sense among league presidents that the ACC can add more schools at a later date if the ACC lost any other schools.

Makes absolutely no sense. The question is why Louisville over UConn or Cincinnati now.

Seems like a clear indication that Louisville was their top choice of the three, but you're right that there's no indication of why. What the guy from ESPN provides is a reason why they added one school rather than three, not a reason why they added Louisville rather than UConn or Cincinnati.

It's surprising to me that they wouldn't jump at the chance to add a basketball powerhouse like UConn, although of course Louisville does have some track record there as well, at least on the men's side. I guess the lure of having a venue with a name like the KFC Yum! Center was just too hard to resist.

Or maybe they looked at their respective programs, the markets they are in, and decided Louisville had more to offer. Certainly UConn football doesn't yet add that much, Louisville seems to add more in that way. Men's basketball is at best a tradeoff as far as UConn is concerned. Yes, they have a great history, but L'ville isn't that far, if at all, behind. With the coaching situation at L'ville being secure, and UConn somewhat unknown, I think the edge also goes to L'ville here. Everything else, including UConn's women's basketball, just doesn't matter. Looking at the market, TV that is, I don't know that UConn brings that much. Others know better than I, but BC probably is a stronger NE draw, and does UConn draw a substantial part of the NYC market? If not, then extending into the edge of the Big Ten and SEC market could help.

L'ville was supposedly very close to being chosen for the Big 12 last year and folks here in WV had talked about their inclusion being a given if the league found a suitable 12th. UConn was seen as a bridge too far for the league and there was no real interest in Cincy. So, they are likely available down the road if necessary while there was a greater chance the Cardinals would be gone. L'ville is also a safer bet in hoops as there is no real guarantee UConn will be the same without Calhoun (they weren't relevant before him) while Louisville has a much longer history. Finally, the seems to be some really bad blood between UConn and BC. Can't imagine the Eagles have that much sway, but sometimes it's easier to just get along.

As a WV native and Mountaineer fan from before I knew there was a Cornell, it's kind of sad watching the demise of all the rivalries I knew as a kid.

Thinking a bit more about it here are two more hypotheses. (1) The really, really big money is in football, and neither UConn nor Cincy really move the needle on that score. (2) With the Big East a shadow of its former self, UConn is going to have more difficulty recruiting for B-Ball; so with Calhoun gone, UConn's fortunes may be about to tank.

Could that increase the likelihood and urgency of Connecticut putting more resources into hockey?

Ronald '09

Swampy

mountainred

Jim Hyla

Josh '99

Swampy

nyc94
ACC votes to add Louisville and sues Maryland to get the full $50 million exit fee.

[espn.go.com]

Brett McMurphy (ESPN)
The ACC also considered UConn and Cincinnati for membership. However, sources told ESPN the league only wanted Louisville because there is a sense among league presidents that the ACC can add more schools at a later date if the ACC lost any other schools.

Makes absolutely no sense. The question is why Louisville over UConn or Cincinnati now.

Seems like a clear indication that Louisville was their top choice of the three, but you're right that there's no indication of why. What the guy from ESPN provides is a reason why they added one school rather than three, not a reason why they added Louisville rather than UConn or Cincinnati.

It's surprising to me that they wouldn't jump at the chance to add a basketball powerhouse like UConn, although of course Louisville does have some track record there as well, at least on the men's side. I guess the lure of having a venue with a name like the KFC Yum! Center was just too hard to resist.

Or maybe they looked at their respective programs, the markets they are in, and decided Louisville had more to offer. Certainly UConn football doesn't yet add that much, Louisville seems to add more in that way. Men's basketball is at best a tradeoff as far as UConn is concerned. Yes, they have a great history, but L'ville isn't that far, if at all, behind. With the coaching situation at L'ville being secure, and UConn somewhat unknown, I think the edge also goes to L'ville here. Everything else, including UConn's women's basketball, just doesn't matter. Looking at the market, TV that is, I don't know that UConn brings that much. Others know better than I, but BC probably is a stronger NE draw, and does UConn draw a substantial part of the NYC market? If not, then extending into the edge of the Big Ten and SEC market could help.

L'ville was supposedly very close to being chosen for the Big 12 last year and folks here in WV had talked about their inclusion being a given if the league found a suitable 12th. UConn was seen as a bridge too far for the league and there was no real interest in Cincy. So, they are likely available down the road if necessary while there was a greater chance the Cardinals would be gone. L'ville is also a safer bet in hoops as there is no real guarantee UConn will be the same without Calhoun (they weren't relevant before him) while Louisville has a much longer history. Finally, the seems to be some really bad blood between UConn and BC. Can't imagine the Eagles have that much sway, but sometimes it's easier to just get along.

As a WV native and Mountaineer fan from before I knew there was a Cornell, it's kind of sad watching the demise of all the rivalries I knew as a kid.

Thinking a bit more about it here are two more hypotheses. (1) The really, really big money is in football, and neither UConn nor Cincy really move the needle on that score. (2) With the Big East a shadow of its former self, UConn is going to have more difficulty recruiting for B-Ball; so with Calhoun gone, UConn's fortunes may be about to tank.

Could that increase the likelihood and urgency of Connecticut putting more resources into hockey?

Why? UConn will be playing in Hockey East, and, even though I'm watching a very good game between BC & BU right now, there's still not much $ in college hockey. Meanwhile, in the money sports the Big East has become CUSA.

RichH

Swampy

mountainred

Jim Hyla

Josh '99

Swampy

nyc94
ACC votes to add Louisville and sues Maryland to get the full $50 million exit fee.

[espn.go.com]

Brett McMurphy (ESPN)
The ACC also considered UConn and Cincinnati for membership. However, sources told ESPN the league only wanted Louisville because there is a sense among league presidents that the ACC can add more schools at a later date if the ACC lost any other schools.

Makes absolutely no sense. The question is why Louisville over UConn or Cincinnati now.

Seems like a clear indication that Louisville was their top choice of the three, but you're right that there's no indication of why. What the guy from ESPN provides is a reason why they added one school rather than three, not a reason why they added Louisville rather than UConn or Cincinnati.

It's surprising to me that they wouldn't jump at the chance to add a basketball powerhouse like UConn, although of course Louisville does have some track record there as well, at least on the men's side. I guess the lure of having a venue with a name like the KFC Yum! Center was just too hard to resist.

Or maybe they looked at their respective programs, the markets they are in, and decided Louisville had more to offer. Certainly UConn football doesn't yet add that much, Louisville seems to add more in that way. Men's basketball is at best a tradeoff as far as UConn is concerned. Yes, they have a great history, but L'ville isn't that far, if at all, behind. With the coaching situation at L'ville being secure, and UConn somewhat unknown, I think the edge also goes to L'ville here. Everything else, including UConn's women's basketball, just doesn't matter. Looking at the market, TV that is, I don't know that UConn brings that much. Others know better than I, but BC probably is a stronger NE draw, and does UConn draw a substantial part of the NYC market? If not, then extending into the edge of the Big Ten and SEC market could help.

L'ville was supposedly very close to being chosen for the Big 12 last year and folks here in WV had talked about their inclusion being a given if the league found a suitable 12th. UConn was seen as a bridge too far for the league and there was no real interest in Cincy. So, they are likely available down the road if necessary while there was a greater chance the Cardinals would be gone. L'ville is also a safer bet in hoops as there is no real guarantee UConn will be the same without Calhoun (they weren't relevant before him) while Louisville has a much longer history. Finally, the seems to be some really bad blood between UConn and BC. Can't imagine the Eagles have that much sway, but sometimes it's easier to just get along.

As a WV native and Mountaineer fan from before I knew there was a Cornell, it's kind of sad watching the demise of all the rivalries I knew as a kid.

Thinking a bit more about it here are two more hypotheses. (1) The really, really big money is in football, and neither UConn nor Cincy really move the needle on that score. (2) With the Big East a shadow of its former self, UConn is going to have more difficulty recruiting for B-Ball; so with Calhoun gone, UConn's fortunes may be about to tank.

It's interesting to observe institutions that seem to tie academic performance to athletic success. I saw a rising slope when I lived in Blacksburg, VA and if everybody is right, I'm about to see the falling slope here in CT. [www.theuconnblog.com]

That was one of the first things SU said about their ACC move, it helps academics. There is, of course, the story that the academic side of ND always wanted to join the Big Ten, but athletics said no. How true, I don't know. But with Louisville taking the Big East BCs berth the ACC looks pretty smart right now.

Jim Hyla

RichH

Swampy

mountainred

Jim Hyla

Josh '99

Swampy

nyc94
ACC votes to add Louisville and sues Maryland to get the full $50 million exit fee.

[espn.go.com]

Brett McMurphy (ESPN)
The ACC also considered UConn and Cincinnati for membership. However, sources told ESPN the league only wanted Louisville because there is a sense among league presidents that the ACC can add more schools at a later date if the ACC lost any other schools.

Makes absolutely no sense. The question is why Louisville over UConn or Cincinnati now.

Seems like a clear indication that Louisville was their top choice of the three, but you're right that there's no indication of why. What the guy from ESPN provides is a reason why they added one school rather than three, not a reason why they added Louisville rather than UConn or Cincinnati.

It's surprising to me that they wouldn't jump at the chance to add a basketball powerhouse like UConn, although of course Louisville does have some track record there as well, at least on the men's side. I guess the lure of having a venue with a name like the KFC Yum! Center was just too hard to resist.

Or maybe they looked at their respective programs, the markets they are in, and decided Louisville had more to offer. Certainly UConn football doesn't yet add that much, Louisville seems to add more in that way. Men's basketball is at best a tradeoff as far as UConn is concerned. Yes, they have a great history, but L'ville isn't that far, if at all, behind. With the coaching situation at L'ville being secure, and UConn somewhat unknown, I think the edge also goes to L'ville here. Everything else, including UConn's women's basketball, just doesn't matter. Looking at the market, TV that is, I don't know that UConn brings that much. Others know better than I, but BC probably is a stronger NE draw, and does UConn draw a substantial part of the NYC market? If not, then extending into the edge of the Big Ten and SEC market could help.

L'ville was supposedly very close to being chosen for the Big 12 last year and folks here in WV had talked about their inclusion being a given if the league found a suitable 12th. UConn was seen as a bridge too far for the league and there was no real interest in Cincy. So, they are likely available down the road if necessary while there was a greater chance the Cardinals would be gone. L'ville is also a safer bet in hoops as there is no real guarantee UConn will be the same without Calhoun (they weren't relevant before him) while Louisville has a much longer history. Finally, the seems to be some really bad blood between UConn and BC. Can't imagine the Eagles have that much sway, but sometimes it's easier to just get along.

As a WV native and Mountaineer fan from before I knew there was a Cornell, it's kind of sad watching the demise of all the rivalries I knew as a kid.

Thinking a bit more about it here are two more hypotheses. (1) The really, really big money is in football, and neither UConn nor Cincy really move the needle on that score. (2) With the Big East a shadow of its former self, UConn is going to have more difficulty recruiting for B-Ball; so with Calhoun gone, UConn's fortunes may be about to tank.

It's interesting to observe institutions that seem to tie academic performance to athletic success. I saw a rising slope when I lived in Blacksburg, VA and if everybody is right, I'm about to see the falling slope here in CT. [www.theuconnblog.com]

That was one of the first things SU said about their ACC move, it helps academics. There is, of course, the story that the academic side of ND always wanted to join the Big Ten, but athletics said no. How true, I don't know. But with Louisville taking the Big East BCs berth the ACC looks pretty smart right now.

I don't buy the argument as stated: year after year, top-notch students find their way to MIT, Amherst, Colorado College, New College, Rice, and other schools lacking highly visible athletics. But in New England public universities are generally treated like stepchildren (the stereotype; no disrespect to real stepchildren). UConn's improved academic status came when the state government decided to invest $1B into UConn over a 10-year period. According to many accounts, the legislature's largess was partly due to the enthusiasm generated by UConn's success in hoops.

Swampy

Jim Hyla

RichH

Swampy

mountainred

Jim Hyla

Josh '99

Swampy

nyc94
ACC votes to add Louisville and sues Maryland to get the full $50 million exit fee.

[espn.go.com]

Brett McMurphy (ESPN)
The ACC also considered UConn and Cincinnati for membership. However, sources told ESPN the league only wanted Louisville because there is a sense among league presidents that the ACC can add more schools at a later date if the ACC lost any other schools.

Makes absolutely no sense. The question is why Louisville over UConn or Cincinnati now.

Seems like a clear indication that Louisville was their top choice of the three, but you're right that there's no indication of why. What the guy from ESPN provides is a reason why they added one school rather than three, not a reason why they added Louisville rather than UConn or Cincinnati.

It's surprising to me that they wouldn't jump at the chance to add a basketball powerhouse like UConn, although of course Louisville does have some track record there as well, at least on the men's side. I guess the lure of having a venue with a name like the KFC Yum! Center was just too hard to resist.

Or maybe they looked at their respective programs, the markets they are in, and decided Louisville had more to offer. Certainly UConn football doesn't yet add that much, Louisville seems to add more in that way. Men's basketball is at best a tradeoff as far as UConn is concerned. Yes, they have a great history, but L'ville isn't that far, if at all, behind. With the coaching situation at L'ville being secure, and UConn somewhat unknown, I think the edge also goes to L'ville here. Everything else, including UConn's women's basketball, just doesn't matter. Looking at the market, TV that is, I don't know that UConn brings that much. Others know better than I, but BC probably is a stronger NE draw, and does UConn draw a substantial part of the NYC market? If not, then extending into the edge of the Big Ten and SEC market could help.

L'ville was supposedly very close to being chosen for the Big 12 last year and folks here in WV had talked about their inclusion being a given if the league found a suitable 12th. UConn was seen as a bridge too far for the league and there was no real interest in Cincy. So, they are likely available down the road if necessary while there was a greater chance the Cardinals would be gone. L'ville is also a safer bet in hoops as there is no real guarantee UConn will be the same without Calhoun (they weren't relevant before him) while Louisville has a much longer history. Finally, the seems to be some really bad blood between UConn and BC. Can't imagine the Eagles have that much sway, but sometimes it's easier to just get along.

As a WV native and Mountaineer fan from before I knew there was a Cornell, it's kind of sad watching the demise of all the rivalries I knew as a kid.

Thinking a bit more about it here are two more hypotheses. (1) The really, really big money is in football, and neither UConn nor Cincy really move the needle on that score. (2) With the Big East a shadow of its former self, UConn is going to have more difficulty recruiting for B-Ball; so with Calhoun gone, UConn's fortunes may be about to tank.

It's interesting to observe institutions that seem to tie academic performance to athletic success. I saw a rising slope when I lived in Blacksburg, VA and if everybody is right, I'm about to see the falling slope here in CT. [www.theuconnblog.com]

That was one of the first things SU said about their ACC move, it helps academics. There is, of course, the story that the academic side of ND always wanted to join the Big Ten, but athletics said no. How true, I don't know. But with Louisville taking the Big East BCs berth the ACC looks pretty smart right now.

I don't buy the argument as stated: year after year, top-notch students find their way to MIT, Amherst, Colorado College, New College, Rice, and other schools lacking highly visible athletics. But in New England public universities are generally treated like stepchildren (the stereotype; no disrespect to real stepchildren). UConn's improved academic status came when the state government decided to invest $1B into UConn over a 10-year period. According to many accounts, the legislature's largess was partly due to the enthusiasm generated by UConn's success in hoops.

No one has said that it is the only way to help academics, just that it can be a reason. To furher understand how there can be cooperation, read this syracuse.com article on "Syracuse University's decision to join the ACC might be a very smart move academically". The author is a former dean of the S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications.

Swampy
I don't buy the argument as stated: year after year, top-notch students find their way to MIT, Amherst, Colorado College, New College, Rice, and other schools lacking highly visible athletics. But in New England public universities are generally treated like stepchildren (the stereotype; no disrespect to real stepchildren). UConn's improved academic status came when the state government decided to invest $1B into UConn over a 10-year period. According to many accounts, the legislature's largess was partly due to the enthusiasm generated by UConn's success in hoops.

Amherst is a big fish in the pond it plays in.

Whether UConn hoops made the legislature send $1 billion to Storrs to spruce up the place or Connecticut recognized the value of higher education in driving the state forward, it was a good move. Maybe also a defensive move to make up for Storrs being nowhere. The UMass campus is an ode to poured concrete in the 1970s in a great college town and the Rutgers campus is more like plots of land linked by bus stops. Our son looked at them all and said that if you could move the UConn physical plant to Amherst, that'd be a school worth attending. Academically, all three are pretty good, at least the main university of each state. Not that each state shouldn't be investing more in higher ed.

billhoward
Amherst is a big fish in the pond it plays in.

Of course. I deliberately constructed my list of examples from highly selective, academically excellent schools. I did this because the blog post in the original link argues the publicity gained from winning draws more applicants, thereby making admission more selective. (Which does not necessarily translate into raised academic standards in the classroom.) I was arguing there are more powerful mechanisms to increase applications.

I also don't doubt that athletically successful schools benefit academically from their success. The disgraceful scandal is the scores of academically mediocre schools that choose to feed mediocre athletic programs, or even successful ones, while cutting back even more on the academic side.

While we're on the subject, I'd add that less selective schools often have academically weaker student bodies including many students who attended subpar public systems or who screwed off in high school and lack appropriate preparation for serious college work even though they are now more mature and willing to work hard. Rather than implement standards that would push students to catch up, many of these schools simply lower standards so that the average graduate does not have the background knowledge that would make them competitive even as incoming applicants at more selective schools.

Here are two indicators. When I was accepted into Cornell Engineering I got a pamphlet saying, among other things, that Cornell expects students to work four hours for every credit hour. At many less selective schools this ratio is three or less. With weaker student bodies this only increases the gap with more selective schools.

Another indicator is general education requirements. At many schools the standards are so vague and the number of Gen. Ed. courses satisfying a requirement is so large that not only is there is absolutely no specific knowledge that students graduating from the institution will reliably have, but also any student who does not want to take a subject because it is "too hard" will be able to avoid the difficult subject and still maintain an Honor Role GPA. Everyone understands the scam, but nobody has an interest in exposing it. This socializes a certain cynicism into students, faculty, and administration.

And we wonder why our civic culture is dominated by spin, while we lose global academic and economic standing.

billhoward
The UMass campus is an ode to poured concrete in the 1970s in a great college town and the Rutgers campus is more like plots of land linked by bus stops.

As a new New Brunswick resident, I have some perspective on this: you're exactly right. Rutgers made the mistake--the same one that many schools have--of building a "University/Office Park of the Future" across the river, even in the face of what surely would have been a favorable investment situation in New Brunswick proper had they chosen to expand in town. And students have been consigned, ever since, to busses, busses, and busses.

Perhaps in response to this slew of bad choices, they also found a way to cram as many parking lots as possible into the downtown "College Avenue" campus, even the Old Queens section, presumably to make it easier to get back and forth. To the credit of New Brunswick and its city government, the tide seems to have turned against more, or at least badly designed, parking lots, but methinks it's going to take some time to change the culture. It's OK--bit better than average New Jersey, but just OK--here as it is, but part of me wonders how good it might be in 20 or 30 years.

Scersk '97

billhoward
The UMass campus is an ode to poured concrete in the 1970s in a great college town and the Rutgers campus is more like plots of land linked by bus stops.

As a new New Brunswick resident, I have some perspective on this: you're exactly right. Rutgers made the mistake--the same one that many schools have--of building a "University/Office Park of the Future" across the river, even in the face of what surely would have been a favorable investment situation in New Brunswick proper had they chosen to expand in town. And students have been consigned, ever since, to busses, busses, and busses.

Perhaps in response to this slew of bad choices, they also found a way to cram as many parking lots as possible into the downtown "College Avenue" campus, even the Old Queens section, presumably to make it easier to get back and forth. To the credit of New Brunswick and its city government, the tide seems to have turned against more, or at least badly designed, parking lots, but methinks it's going to take some time to change the culture. It's OK--bit better than average New Jersey, but just OK--here as it is, but part of me wonders how good it might be in 20 or 30 years.

My daughter is a HS senior, and Rutgers was the only campus that she visited that she really disliked (I did as well) -- a disjointed campus with a majority of ugly buildings.

scoop85

Scersk '97

billhoward
The UMass campus is an ode to poured concrete in the 1970s in a great college town and the Rutgers campus is more like plots of land linked by bus stops.

As a new New Brunswick resident, I have some perspective on this: you're exactly right. Rutgers made the mistake--the same one that many schools have--of building a "University/Office Park of the Future" across the river, even in the face of what surely would have been a favorable investment situation in New Brunswick proper had they chosen to expand in town. And students have been consigned, ever since, to busses, busses, and busses.

Perhaps in response to this slew of bad choices, they also found a way to cram as many parking lots as possible into the downtown "College Avenue" campus, even the Old Queens section, presumably to make it easier to get back and forth. To the credit of New Brunswick and its city government, the tide seems to have turned against more, or at least badly designed, parking lots, but methinks it's going to take some time to change the culture. It's OK--bit better than average New Jersey, but just OK--here as it is, but part of me wonders how good it might be in 20 or 30 years.

My daughter is a HS senior, and Rutgers was the only campus that she visited that she really disliked (I did as well) -- a disjointed campus with a majority of ugly buildings.

Did she visit SUNY Albany?

Swampy

scoop85

Scersk '97

billhoward
The UMass campus is an ode to poured concrete in the 1970s in a great college town and the Rutgers campus is more like plots of land linked by bus stops.

As a new New Brunswick resident, I have some perspective on this: you're exactly right. Rutgers made the mistake--the same one that many schools have--of building a "University/Office Park of the Future" across the river, even in the face of what surely would have been a favorable investment situation in New Brunswick proper had they chosen to expand in town. And students have been consigned, ever since, to busses, busses, and busses.

Perhaps in response to this slew of bad choices, they also found a way to cram as many parking lots as possible into the downtown "College Avenue" campus, even the Old Queens section, presumably to make it easier to get back and forth. To the credit of New Brunswick and its city government, the tide seems to have turned against more, or at least badly designed, parking lots, but methinks it's going to take some time to change the culture. It's OK--bit better than average New Jersey, but just OK--here as it is, but part of me wonders how good it might be in 20 or 30 years.

My daughter is a HS senior, and Rutgers was the only campus that she visited that she really disliked (I did as well) -- a disjointed campus with a majority of ugly buildings.

Did she visit SUNY Albany?

No, but I've heard it's a concrete nightmare

scoop85

Swampy

scoop85

Scersk '97

billhoward
The UMass campus is an ode to poured concrete in the 1970s in a great college town and the Rutgers campus is more like plots of land linked by bus stops.

As a new New Brunswick resident, I have some perspective on this: you're exactly right. Rutgers made the mistake--the same one that many schools have--of building a "University/Office Park of the Future" across the river, even in the face of what surely would have been a favorable investment situation in New Brunswick proper had they chosen to expand in town. And students have been consigned, ever since, to busses, busses, and busses.

Perhaps in response to this slew of bad choices, they also found a way to cram as many parking lots as possible into the downtown "College Avenue" campus, even the Old Queens section, presumably to make it easier to get back and forth. To the credit of New Brunswick and its city government, the tide seems to have turned against more, or at least badly designed, parking lots, but methinks it's going to take some time to change the culture. It's OK--bit better than average New Jersey, but just OK--here as it is, but part of me wonders how good it might be in 20 or 30 years.

My daughter is a HS senior, and Rutgers was the only campus that she visited that she really disliked (I did as well) -- a disjointed campus with a majority of ugly buildings.

Did she visit SUNY Albany?

No, but I've heard it's a concrete nightmare

Once you're on campus SUNY-A is not remarkably bad, it's just another 13th grade campus like you'd see at most schools. But there is no connection between the town and the campus except for cars and buses, and that makes it depressing.

scoop85

Swampy

scoop85

Scersk '97

billhoward
The UMass campus is an ode to poured concrete in the 1970s in a great college town and the Rutgers campus is more like plots of land linked by bus stops.

As a new New Brunswick resident, I have some perspective on this: you're exactly right. Rutgers made the mistake--the same one that many schools have--of building a "University/Office Park of the Future" across the river, even in the face of what surely would have been a favorable investment situation in New Brunswick proper had they chosen to expand in town. And students have been consigned, ever since, to busses, busses, and busses.

Perhaps in response to this slew of bad choices, they also found a way to cram as many parking lots as possible into the downtown "College Avenue" campus, even the Old Queens section, presumably to make it easier to get back and forth. To the credit of New Brunswick and its city government, the tide seems to have turned against more, or at least badly designed, parking lots, but methinks it's going to take some time to change the culture. It's OK--bit better than average New Jersey, but just OK--here as it is, but part of me wonders how good it might be in 20 or 30 years.

My daughter is a HS senior, and Rutgers was the only campus that she visited that she really disliked (I did as well) -- a disjointed campus with a majority of ugly buildings.

Did she visit SUNY Albany?

No, but I've heard it's a concrete nightmare

My friend who attends Albany very proudly (well, sort of mock pride) told me if you were to combine all buildings at Albany into one, it would be the second largest concrete structure in North America (maybe it was the US?), after only the Hoover Dam.

Trotsky

scoop85

Swampy

scoop85

Scersk '97

billhoward
The UMass campus is an ode to poured concrete in the 1970s in a great college town and the Rutgers campus is more like plots of land linked by bus stops.

As a new New Brunswick resident, I have some perspective on this: you're exactly right. Rutgers made the mistake--the same one that many schools have--of building a "University/Office Park of the Future" across the river, even in the face of what surely would have been a favorable investment situation in New Brunswick proper had they chosen to expand in town. And students have been consigned, ever since, to busses, busses, and busses.

Perhaps in response to this slew of bad choices, they also found a way to cram as many parking lots as possible into the downtown "College Avenue" campus, even the Old Queens section, presumably to make it easier to get back and forth. To the credit of New Brunswick and its city government, the tide seems to have turned against more, or at least badly designed, parking lots, but methinks it's going to take some time to change the culture. It's OK--bit better than average New Jersey, but just OK--here as it is, but part of me wonders how good it might be in 20 or 30 years.

My daughter is a HS senior, and Rutgers was the only campus that she visited that she really disliked (I did as well) -- a disjointed campus with a majority of ugly buildings.

Did she visit SUNY Albany?

No, but I've heard it's a concrete nightmare

Once you're on campus SUNY-A is not remarkably bad, it's just another 13th grade campus like you'd see at most schools. But there is no connection between the town and the campus except for cars and buses, and that makes it depressing.

At least the parts I've seen are '60's modernist architecture at its peak or nadir, depending on your point of view. Some people love it; others hate it.

From my perspective, if you put bars on the windows and a fence around the campus, you could easily mistake it for a prison.

Swampy

Trotsky

scoop85

Swampy

scoop85

Scersk '97

billhoward
The UMass campus is an ode to poured concrete in the 1970s in a great college town and the Rutgers campus is more like plots of land linked by bus stops.

As a new New Brunswick resident, I have some perspective on this: you're exactly right. Rutgers made the mistake--the same one that many schools have--of building a "University/Office Park of the Future" across the river, even in the face of what surely would have been a favorable investment situation in New Brunswick proper had they chosen to expand in town. And students have been consigned, ever since, to busses, busses, and busses.

Perhaps in response to this slew of bad choices, they also found a way to cram as many parking lots as possible into the downtown "College Avenue" campus, even the Old Queens section, presumably to make it easier to get back and forth. To the credit of New Brunswick and its city government, the tide seems to have turned against more, or at least badly designed, parking lots, but methinks it's going to take some time to change the culture. It's OK--bit better than average New Jersey, but just OK--here as it is, but part of me wonders how good it might be in 20 or 30 years.

My daughter is a HS senior, and Rutgers was the only campus that she visited that she really disliked (I did as well) -- a disjointed campus with a majority of ugly buildings.

Did she visit SUNY Albany?

No, but I've heard it's a concrete nightmare

Once you're on campus SUNY-A is not remarkably bad, it's just another 13th grade campus like you'd see at most schools. But there is no connection between the town and the campus except for cars and buses, and that makes it depressing.

At least the parts I've seen are '60's modernist architecture at its peak or nadir, depending on your point of view. Some people love it; others hate it.

From my perspective, if you put bars on the windows and a fence around the campus, you could easily mistake it for a prison.

[fuckyeahbrutalism.tumblr.com]

RichH

Swampy

Trotsky

scoop85

Swampy

scoop85

Scersk '97

billhoward
The UMass campus is an ode to poured concrete in the 1970s in a great college town and the Rutgers campus is more like plots of land linked by bus stops.

As a new New Brunswick resident, I have some perspective on this: you're exactly right. Rutgers made the mistake--the same one that many schools have--of building a "University/Office Park of the Future" across the river, even in the face of what surely would have been a favorable investment situation in New Brunswick proper had they chosen to expand in town. And students have been consigned, ever since, to busses, busses, and busses.

Perhaps in response to this slew of bad choices, they also found a way to cram as many parking lots as possible into the downtown "College Avenue" campus, even the Old Queens section, presumably to make it easier to get back and forth. To the credit of New Brunswick and its city government, the tide seems to have turned against more, or at least badly designed, parking lots, but methinks it's going to take some time to change the culture. It's OK--bit better than average New Jersey, but just OK--here as it is, but part of me wonders how good it might be in 20 or 30 years.

My daughter is a HS senior, and Rutgers was the only campus that she visited that she really disliked (I did as well) -- a disjointed campus with a majority of ugly buildings.

Did she visit SUNY Albany?

No, but I've heard it's a concrete nightmare

Once you're on campus SUNY-A is not remarkably bad, it's just another 13th grade campus like you'd see at most schools. But there is no connection between the town and the campus except for cars and buses, and that makes it depressing.

At least the parts I've seen are '60's modernist architecture at its peak or nadir, depending on your point of view. Some people love it; others hate it.

From my perspective, if you put bars on the windows and a fence around the campus, you could easily mistake it for a prison.

[fuckyeahbrutalism.tumblr.com]

The interior shot of the Negev synagogue is sort of nice. I guess it helps to have an architect who doesn't worry about anything.

Scersk '97

billhoward
The UMass campus is an ode to poured concrete in the 1970s in a great college town and the Rutgers campus is more like plots of land linked by bus stops.

As a new New Brunswick resident, I have some perspective on this: you're exactly right. Rutgers made the mistake--the same one that many schools have--of building a "University/Office Park of the Future" across the river, even in the face of what surely would have been a favorable investment situation in New Brunswick proper had they chosen to expand in town. And students have been consigned, ever since, to busses, busses, and busses.

Perhaps in response to this slew of bad choices, they also found a way to cram as many parking lots as possible into the downtown "College Avenue" campus, even the Old Queens section, presumably to make it easier to get back and forth. To the credit of New Brunswick and its city government, the tide seems to have turned against more, or at least badly designed, parking lots, but methinks it's going to take some time to change the culture. It's OK--bit better than average New Jersey, but just OK--here as it is, but part of me wonders how good it might be in 20 or 30 years.

New Jersey is as much of a car culture as anywhere in the country, especially considering it's an area that actually has transit options.

Swampy
When I was accepted into Cornell Engineering I got a pamphlet saying, among other things, that Cornell expects students to work four hours for every credit hour.

Holy crap, is that what I was supposed to do? No wonder my grades were crap.

RichH
http://fuckyeahbrutalism.tumblr.com

It's easy to be a transformative visionary when you despise your client.

RichH
[fuckyeahbrutalism.tumblr.com]

Just brutalism with glass, a few desultory curves, and an insulting tin ceiling.

Scersk '97

RichH
[fuckyeahbrutalism.tumblr.com]

Just brutalism with glass, a few desultory curves, and an insulting tin ceiling.

1316215319-milstein-hall-exterior-view-from-university-avenue-copyright-cornell-university.jpg

Hey Cornell, your crucufix fell over!

Scersk '97

RichH
[fuckyeahbrutalism.tumblr.com]

Just brutalism with glass, a few desultory curves, and an insulting tin ceiling.

1316215319-milstein-hall-exterior-view-from-university-avenue-copyright-cornell-university.jpg

Just what I was thinking. Sadly, too many of Cornell's recent additions are similarly brutal. The Ives addition, for instance, is brutalism with a partial stone veneer.

Remember, it's only profound if it's unpleasant.

Trotsky
Remember, it's only profound if it's unpleasant.

I think I've made this point before, but the real problem here is that the trustees generally don't have to cross campus every day, or (ever) use the buildings they advocate or approve. When minor stakeholders have the final say on something, it's a complete crapshoot whether the end result will optimally serve the major stakeholders. You might say, "Well, don't all universities have this problem?" Yup, which is why the vast majority of them have ugly-ass buildings. Cornell ceased to be an exception to this decades ago.

Kyle Rose

Trotsky
Remember, it's only profound if it's unpleasant.

I think I've made this point before, but the real problem here is that the trustees generally don't have to cross campus every day, or (ever) use the buildings they advocate or approve. When minor stakeholders have the final say on something, it's a complete crapshoot whether the end result will optimally serve the major stakeholders. You might say, "Well, don't all universities have this problem?" Yup, which is why the vast majority of them have ugly-ass buildings. Cornell ceased to be an exception to this decades ago.

It's not just ugly-ass buildings individually. They also mix aesthetically incompatible buildings next to each other, which by themselves individually are OK.

Swampy

Kyle Rose

Trotsky
Remember, it's only profound if it's unpleasant.

I think I've made this point before, but the real problem here is that the trustees generally don't have to cross campus every day, or (ever) use the buildings they advocate or approve. When minor stakeholders have the final say on something, it's a complete crapshoot whether the end result will optimally serve the major stakeholders. You might say, "Well, don't all universities have this problem?" Yup, which is why the vast majority of them have ugly-ass buildings. Cornell ceased to be an exception to this decades ago.

It's not just ugly-ass buildings individually. They also mix aesthetically incompatible buildings next to each other, which by themselves individually are OK.

Nah, they're pretty ugly on their own.

It's been all down hill since