Notre Dame to ACC

[RichH]

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

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8685541/acc-votes-add-louisville-cardinals-source-says

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. http://www.theuconnblog.com/2012/11/28/3702058/uconn-louisville-acc-expansion-realignment-academics

[Ronald '09]

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

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8685541/acc-votes-add-louisville-cardinals-source-says

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?

[Swampy]

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

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8685541/acc-votes-add-louisville-cardinals-source-says

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.

[Jim Hyla]

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

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8685541/acc-votes-add-louisville-cardinals-source-says

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. http://www.theuconnblog.com/2012/11/28/3702058/uconn-louisville-acc-expansion-realignment-academics

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.

[Swampy]

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

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8685541/acc-votes-add-louisville-cardinals-source-says

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. http://www.theuconnblog.com/2012/11/28/3702058/uconn-louisville-acc-expansion-realignment-academics

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.

[Jim Hyla]

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

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8685541/acc-votes-add-louisville-cardinals-source-says

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. http://www.theuconnblog.com/2012/11/28/3702058/uconn-louisville-acc-expansion-realignment-academics

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.

[billhoward]

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.

[Swampy]

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.

[Scersk '97]

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.

[scoop85]

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.

[Swampy]

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?

[scoop85]

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

[Trotsky]

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.

[jtn27]

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.

[Swampy]

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.