junglehusky
Molotov Cocktail of Ugliness
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 7,183
- Reaction Score
- 15,535
I think NNBE apologists are underestimating UConn's desire to be in a conference with peer institutions. UConn has spent 25 years transforming from a run-of-the-mill New England public, associating with Maine, URI, UNH*, along with the likes of Providence and Seton Hall, to a national public research university. Even back in the '90's presidents and provosts publicly stated that our academic goal was to be in the same elite public research tier as Wisconsin, UNC and the California system. In addition to providing athletics competition, it makes sense for student recruiting (athletes and non-athletes) to be in a conference with institutions that you consider your peers, with similar student bodies, similar missions, similar goals for the future. Herbst has stressed this after the Pitt/SU defections when UConn was rumored to be on the ACC's list.
In the OBE/NBE we had that good fit with Pitt, Rutgers, even schools like USF, Cinci fit the bill of up and coming research university. In the future we can enhance that with UNC/Duke/UVa/MD or (less likely, in the far future) Michigan/Wisconsin/Illinois etc. What about future NNBE additions? The service academies are positives, but they obviously have really different missions. Temple does have research component, but I don't know how strong they are compared to where UConn currently is and wants to be. UCF is probably similar in profile and potential to USF, maybe a little behind. But as far as SMU, Houston, Boise and you can toss in TCU for comparison... they are fine schools (well not Boise**) but not what UConn considers peers. On average, this group is a net neutral at best., probably a slight minus since we lose Pitt. And if we have to take ECU or Memphis you just know administrators at UConn will not be pleased.
We will play with our new conference mates on the field for as long as circumstances dictate, but the NNBE is never going to be our true HOME. That is why we are going to pay the ten million and jump to the ACC at the first opportunity. Even in the unlikely event we have to take a step down in TV revenue.
*For the record, these schools are still REALLY GOOD schools, they just haven't been able to invest academically or athletically to the same degree as UConn over the long term. Being smaller states might mean their budgets take harder hits in an economic downturn, and smaller increases when the economy is good
**We have another thread on Boise's academics. I agree with the point being made there that there's more to judging a school's contribution to its surrounding community than graduation rates. I wish there were better funding for commuter schools, rural and tribal colleges, community, vocational, and junior colleges so that kids don't wind up getting nearly worthless degrees from for-profit online colleges with mountains of debt. My mom taught at CCSU and she said that although some of her students were uninterested or just didn't belong in college, there were also some really good students in there too. Sometimes they had circumstances like having to care for a sick parent, or were returning to school after a career change or having kids. Hard to truck off to Storrs or out of state in that case. So we should not denigrate these schools out of hand. Having said that, if Herbst decides UConn would be better served by associating with UNC over Boise state, that does not make her an balloon knot.
In the OBE/NBE we had that good fit with Pitt, Rutgers, even schools like USF, Cinci fit the bill of up and coming research university. In the future we can enhance that with UNC/Duke/UVa/MD or (less likely, in the far future) Michigan/Wisconsin/Illinois etc. What about future NNBE additions? The service academies are positives, but they obviously have really different missions. Temple does have research component, but I don't know how strong they are compared to where UConn currently is and wants to be. UCF is probably similar in profile and potential to USF, maybe a little behind. But as far as SMU, Houston, Boise and you can toss in TCU for comparison... they are fine schools (well not Boise**) but not what UConn considers peers. On average, this group is a net neutral at best., probably a slight minus since we lose Pitt. And if we have to take ECU or Memphis you just know administrators at UConn will not be pleased.
We will play with our new conference mates on the field for as long as circumstances dictate, but the NNBE is never going to be our true HOME. That is why we are going to pay the ten million and jump to the ACC at the first opportunity. Even in the unlikely event we have to take a step down in TV revenue.
*For the record, these schools are still REALLY GOOD schools, they just haven't been able to invest academically or athletically to the same degree as UConn over the long term. Being smaller states might mean their budgets take harder hits in an economic downturn, and smaller increases when the economy is good
**We have another thread on Boise's academics. I agree with the point being made there that there's more to judging a school's contribution to its surrounding community than graduation rates. I wish there were better funding for commuter schools, rural and tribal colleges, community, vocational, and junior colleges so that kids don't wind up getting nearly worthless degrees from for-profit online colleges with mountains of debt. My mom taught at CCSU and she said that although some of her students were uninterested or just didn't belong in college, there were also some really good students in there too. Sometimes they had circumstances like having to care for a sick parent, or were returning to school after a career change or having kids. Hard to truck off to Storrs or out of state in that case. So we should not denigrate these schools out of hand. Having said that, if Herbst decides UConn would be better served by associating with UNC over Boise state, that does not make her an balloon knot.
