Irish fan on why UConn belongs in the ACC

[specialisthusky]

Is this real? Yale? Penn? Harvard...nah. Omg this board has gone full mountaineer

 

[upstater]

Is this real? Yale? Penn? Harvard...nah. Omg this board has gone full mountaineer

That happened several weeks ago with the influx of loopy posters.

 

[NotreDameJoe]

I wonder if an Ivy League school can say "We're going to be elite in college athletics too" without being expelled and losing her academic reputation.

It's a long off-season.

 

[upstater]

I wonder if an Ivy League school can say "We're going to be elite in college athletics too" without being expelled and losing her academic reputation.

It's a long off-season.

Why would an Ivy League school cheapen its degree in such a fashion?

 

[TerryD]

Thats like a young women saying she is a " quasi- virgin ". And later on, that she is " quasi- pregnant ".
Oh sure. ( lol!)

So then Notre Dame is a full member of the ACC in all sports, including football?

 

[NotreDameJoe]

Why would an Ivy League school cheapen its degree in such a fashion?

So "No" is your answer?

 

[upstater]

So "No" is your answer?

Questions require contemplation. In this case, I can't even begin. So how can I answer. They won't cheapen their degree.

 

[btstimpy]

Why would an Ivy League school cheapen its degree in such a fashion?

Why not? Stanford and Duke are ranked ahead of several of them academically.

 

[btstimpy]

I wonder if an Ivy League school can say "We're going to be elite in college athletics too" without being expelled and losing her academic reputation.

It's a long off-season.

They could. Duke and Stanford are ranked well ahead of Cornell academically and ahead of Penn. Those schools should get off their high horse and get on the gridiron so somebody can know who they are. Duke went to the Chick Fil A Bowl last year, and Stanford the Rose.

 

[MSNDfan]

They could. Duke and Stanford are ranked well ahead of Cornell academically and ahead of Penn. Those schools should get off their high horse and get on the gridiron so somebody can know who they are. Duke went to the Chick Fil A Bowl last year, and Stanford the Rose.

Cornell would be especially interesting in that sense, because it has NY's land grant Ag college.

 

[upstater]

Why not? Stanford and Duke are ranked ahead of several of them academically.

Still a cheapening of the degree. There is no incentive for them to do it. Duke maybe needed to do it. U. Pennsylvania doesn't need it, and though U. Penn. is ranked behind Duke in that USNWR rag, I wouldn't put too much stock in that ranking. Give me U. Penn. all day. Stabford certainly doesn't need it either.

 

[MSNDfan]

Still a cheapening of the degree. There is no incentive for them to do it. Duke maybe needed to do it. U. Pennsylvania doesn't need it, and though U. Penn. is ranked behind Duke in that USNWR rag, I wouldn't put too much stock in that ranking. Give me U. Penn. all day. Stabford certainly doesn't need it either.

No doubt about it - a Stanford degree is cheapened because Stanford sponsors scholarship sports in the Pac.

And if only Northwestern did not play scholarship sports in the BeeOneGee, its degrees would be worth a great deal.

The Rice and Tulane alums are absolutely thrilled that their schools are no longer tainted by being in major conferences, because now their degrees are not cheapened. And they are trying to get their schools to end all athletics scholarships.

 

[Adios]

ACC people, door is over there. Please exit.

Bunch of two-facers. Good luck with Syracuse, BC....and Temple!

 

[Waquoit]

Thats like a young women saying she is a " quasi- virgin ". And later on, that she is " quasi- pregnant ". ( lol!)

Isn't that a tenant of ND and BCU's belief system?

 

[upstater]

Why not? Stanford and Duke are ranked ahead of several of them academically.

Still a cheapening of the degree. There is no incentive for them to do it. Duke maybe needed to do it. U. Pennsylvania doesn't need it, and though U. Penn. is ranked behind Duke in that USNWR rag, I wouldn't put too much stock in that ranking.

No doubt about it - a Stanford degree is cheapened because Stanford sponsors scholarship sports in the Pac.

And if only Northwestern did not play scholarship sports in the BeeOneGee, its degrees would be worth a great deal.

The Rice and Tulane alums are absolutely thrilled that their schools are no longer tainted by being in major conferences, because now their degrees are not cheapened. And they are trying to get their schools to end all athletics scholarships.

Tulane had a huge betting scandal. It dented the school. When Richard Sherman is flipping out in front on 200 million Americans, Stanford is thrilled that he represents them!!

Face reality: there is ZERO incentive for these schools to add sports. Your school may rely on its press to build academics, but there are much better schools out there in the world. in fact, they dominate the USNWR that you guys love so much.

 

[Yawkey Way]

So then Notre Dame is a full me

They could. Duke and Stanford are ranked well ahead of Cornell academically and ahead of Penn. Those schools should get off their high horse and get on the gridiron so somebody can know who they are. Duke went to the Chick Fil A Bowl last year, and Stanford the Rose.

mber of the ACC in all sports, including football?

College sports, neither advances, nor diminishes ,the value of college degrees over the long haul, imo. College sports success does give an uptick in the quality of applicants that Admissions Depts pour through... this much is true, but few employers are evaluating applicants before them in interviews by whether or not their school football or basketball team is winning or losing. Duke could go 0-13 for the next 10 years in football, but a Duke recent grad is probably going to get the job if he or she is up against an Alabama grad, all other things being equal..... as for the Ivies, their schools don't need major colllege football for anything at all,. Harvard's ( for just one example ) annual endowment which is made up of millions of dollars, dwarfs that of most colleges playing major college football. Harvard's annual endowment is double that of Stanford's, 5 times that of Notre Dame, and 6-20 times more than most others playing major college football.

 

[upstater]

College sports, neither advances, nor diminishes ,the value of college degrees over the long haul, imo. College sports success does give an uptick in the quality of applicants that Admissions Depts pour through... this much is true, but few employers are evaluating applicants before them in interviews by whether or not their school football or basketball team is winning or losing. Duke could go 0-13 for the next 10 years in football, but a Duke recent grad is probably going to get the job if he or she is up against an Alabama grad, all other things being equal..... as for the Ivies, their schools don't need major colllege football for anything at all,. Harvard's ( for just oneexample ) annual endowment made up of billions of dollars, dwarfs that of most colleges playing major college football.

Andrew Zimbalist would beg to differ. He shows that certain academic institutions are helped by sports. Schools like Boise St., or Notre Dame, or heck the Flutie effect at BC. Others are hurt by it. After all, someone wins, someone loses, and sometimes the losing schools develop a reputation, a kind of loser's stink, that hurts applications. This eventually impacts academics. I would also add that Zimbalist thinks the majority of schools pouring money into sports are not helped by it. You have to WIN! Then you're helped. And lastly, college applications are rising by more than double digits (closer to 20%) year-on-year at many state institutions even without bigtime sports. most of this has to do with the electronic common app and the willingness of students now to attend state schools out-of-state.

 

[Yawkey Way]

Andrew Zimbalist would beg to differ. He shows that certain academic institutions are helped by sports. Schools like Boise St., or Notre Dame, or heck the Flutie effect at BC. Others are hurt by it. After all, someone wins, someone loses, and sometimes the losing schools develop a reputation, a kind of loser's stink, that hurts applications. This eventually impacts academics. I would also add that Zimbalist thinks the majority of schools pouring money into sports are not helped by it. You have to WIN! Then you're helped. And lastly, college applications are rising by more than double digits (closer to 20%) year-on-year at many state institutions even without bigtime sports. most of this has to do with the electronic common app and the willingness of students now to attend state schools out-of-state.

True... I did acknowledge schools do get momentary upticks in apps to their schools, and the pool of applicants abilities does rise, but by and large, "over the long haul ", its mostly insignificant in the values of these degrees, which after all, the " value " of which is determined by employers.

 

[upstater]

True... I did acknowledge schools do get momentary upticks in apps to their schools, and the pool of applicants abilities does rise, but by and large, "over the long haul ", its mostly insignificant in the values of these degrees, which after all, the " value " of which is determined by employers.

The value is determined by the holders. You'll find very high satisfaction with alum from liberal arts colleges. But in terms of earnings, they trail the more high powered research institutions. It's also true that if you're attracting better students, your academic profile will rise. That being said, yes academic affiliations on the basis of sports are insignificant and it's really wishful thinking to believe that your profile is going to improve on the back of sports. The reverse can happen (Rutgers has been plummeting in the rankings even as it has been pouring money into athletics).

 

[Yawkey Way]

The value is determined by the holders. You'll find very high satisfaction with alum from liberal arts colleges. But in terms of earnings, they trail the more high powered research institutions. It's also true that if you're attracting better students, your academic profile will rise. That being said, yes academic affiliations on the basis of sports are insignificant and it's really wishful thinking to believe that your profile is going to improve on the back of sports. The reverse can happen (Rutgers has been plummeting in the rankings even as it has been pouring money into athletics).

Good, and valid points... as somewhat related, I read an interesting book ( wish I could remember the name of it now), maybe 10 years or so ago, about the development of the Univ. of Texas rise in Academic standings from a once backwater, rural school to one with more Academic national stature that it possess today. The discovery of oil in that neck of the woods no doubt helped make a few rich there in Texas, and naturally that oil money flowed later with benefactors to Austin... but the book went on to explain that the Univ.Texas at Austin itself made a conscious effort itself to invest in a football program that it believed was something that could elevate their school nationally in football, but as a secondary benefit, it would increase its national footprint as a University, instead of being just a local, regional school. It worked even better than they had hoped. The emergence of Texas as a football national power even brought eastern professors out to their school to teach, something unheard of in earlier beginnings. Some of this was the national migration westward, and better transportation to get to and from Austin and those factors as influences,, but the book does credit the football at this school as a significant factor as well that helped elevate the school's national academic standing. So insofar as the Univ. of Texas at Austin is concerned anyway, there is merit in what some say, ie that sports can elevate a schools Academic national stature.

 

[upstater]

Good, and valid points... as somewhat related, I read an interesting book ( wish I could remember the name of it now), maybe 10 years or so ago, about the development of the Univ. of Texas rise in Academic standings from a once backwater, rural school to one with more Academic national stature that it possess today. The discovery of oil in that neck of the woods no doubt helped make a few rich there in Texas, and naturally that oil money flowed later with benefactors to Austin... but the book went on to explain that the Univ.Texas at Austin itself made a conscious effort itself to invest in a football program that it believed was something that could elevate their school nationally in football, but as a secondary benefit, it would increase its national footprint as a University, instead of being just a local, regional school. It worked even better than they had hoped. The emergence of Texas as a football national power even brought eastern professors out to their school to teach, something unheard of in earlier beginnings. Some of this was the national migration westward, and better transportation to get to and from Austin and those factors as influences,, but the book does credit the football at this school as a significant factor as well that helped elevate the school's national academic standing. So insofar as the Univ. of Texas at Austin is concerned anyway, there is merit in what some say, ie that sports can elevate a schools Academic national stature.

I am not a big believer in such theories. For a couple of reasons. One, these schools had big football programs prior to the late 1950s. It was in the late 1950s that many of the state schools in the 1920s grew out of regional schools to become big state and national institutions. And it wasn't because of football. It was because of the Cold War and the huge investment in research in that time, which coincided with the GI Bill. If you looked at American higher ed in the 1930s and 1940s, it looked like finishing school, for well mannered bluebloods. The aftermath of WW2 brought a new intensity to higher education, and he filthy masses entered the ivory towers for the first time. That changed everything.

 

[BlueHen]

They could. Duke and Stanford are ranked well ahead of Cornell academically and ahead of Penn. Those schools should get off their high horse and get on the gridiron so somebody can know who they are. Duke went to the Chick Fil A Bowl last year, and Stanford the Rose.

Huh? People know who they are, elevating their respective football programs isn't going to make them anymore well known.

 

[BlueHen]

ACC people, door is over there. Please exit.

Bunch of two-facers. Good luck with Syracuse, BC....and Temple!

If UConn gets an invite to the ACC them I will be an ACC fan. Until then, screw 'em. The ACC has had multiple opportunities to add UConn and has passed every time. I'm glad that some ACC fans think we belong, but I am tired of them coming on here telling us how the great ACC is, how great Notre Dame is, how much the B1G sucks and how much Rutgers sucks.

 

[NotreDameJoe]

I am not a big believer in such theories. For a couple of reasons. One, these schools had big football programs prior to the late 1950s. It was in the late 1950s that many of the state schools in the 1920s grew out of regional schools to become big state and national institutions. And it wasn't because of football. It was because of the Cold War and the huge investment in research in that time, which coincided with the GI Bill. If you looked at American higher ed in the 1930s and 1940s, it looked like finishing school, for well mannered bluebloods. The aftermath of WW2 brought a new intensity to higher education, and he filthy masses entered the ivory towers for the first time. That changed everything.

The reason you've heard of Purdue but maybe not Bowling Green is athletics period. Their conference membership started solely for sports.

Here's my question though: why didn't the Ivy league's academic reputation suffer back when they were good at football?

 

[Adios]

The reason you've heard of Purdue but maybe not Bowling Green is athletics period. Their conference membership started solely for sports.

Here's my question though: why didn't the Ivy league's academic reputation suffer back when they were good at football?

Bowling Green also plays D1 athletics....

 

[Seaa Blue]

The reason you've heard of Purdue but maybe not Bowling Green is athletics period?

Neil Armstrong and the 25 other Purdue grads that have flown in space beg to differ.

 

[Yawkey Way]

you looked at American higher ed in the 1930s and 1940s, it looked like finishing school, for well mannered bluebloods. The aftermath of WW2 brought a new intensity to higher education, and he filthy masses entered the ivory towers for the first time. That changed everything.

Yes, the post WW2 generation that came back from the War benefitted from the GI Bill.

Fast forward to today and its a changed dynamic so much that the last US Census figures find we have approx. 120,000 full time janitors with 4 year college degrees. So something has gone off the rails with that stastistic... as thats not good by any measure..

 

[MSNDfan]

If UConn gets an invite to the ACC them I will be an ACC fan. Until then, screw 'em. The ACC has had multiple opportunities to add UConn and has passed every time. I'm glad that some ACC fans think we belong, but I am tired of them coming on here telling us how the great ACC is, how great Notre Dame is, how much the B1G sucks and how much Rutgers sucks.

Some fans of ACC schools, including ND, come here to say they feel UConn belongs in the ACC, and your attitude is 'screw the ACC' until we get in.

Not very friendly, is it? Especially when you are as defensive of the BeeOneGee and Rutgers as if you were in the former because the latter demanded you be admitted.

But UConn is not in the BeeOneGee, and only the naive think Rutgers has anyone involved with its sports who wants to share its NYC area status in the BeeOneGee with UConn, which would outshine poor pitiful Rutgers embarrassingly easily.

And why does such a common, for this UConn board anyway, pattern of openly despising the ACC bother those of who who have said we think UConn belongs in the ACC? Because one thing that conference commissioners and school ADs have learned from the past few years is that the opinions and attitudes of fans online matter. They matter so much that should the Big 12 come apart, and both the ACC and SEC expand to 16, WVU will get an invite from neither. The main reason is that WVU fans online have so befouled the reputation of the sports programs they love that nobody wants to get near them.

If UConn fans get a reputation for bitterness morphing into a WVU level of hatred for the ACC, then there may be little that UConn administrators can do to overcome the new bad reputation of UConn fans.

Now if UConn were absolutely certain of an invite from the BeeOneGee, and/or the Big 12, that might not be so bad. But any potential limiting of options in this climate is not the most wise path.

 

[upstater]

Yes, the post WW2 generation that came back from the War benefitted from the GI Bill.

Fast forward to today and its a changed dynamic so much that the last US Census figures find we have approx. 120,000 full time janitors with 4 year college degrees. So something has gone off the rails with that stastistic... as thats not good by any measure..

We're getting into a whole other discussion, but more than just the WW2s benefited from GI Bill. It transformed higher ed.

The USA was a surplus country back then, but that changed in the mid 1970s, so the economic question about janitors really isn't related.

 

[upstater]

Some fans of ACC schools, including ND, come here to say they feel UConn belongs in the ACC, and your attitude is 'screw the ACC' until we get in.

Not very friendly, is it? Especially when you are as defensive of the BeeOneGee and Rutgers as if you were in the former because the latter demanded you be admitted.

But UConn is not in the BeeOneGee, and only the naive think Rutgers has anyone involved with its sports who wants to share its NYC area status in the BeeOneGee with UConn, which would outshine poor pitiful Rutgers embarrassingly easily.

And why does such a common, for this UConn board anyway, pattern of openly despising the ACC bother those of who who have said we think UConn belongs in the ACC? Because one thing that conference commissioners and school ADs have learned from the past few years is that the opinions and attitudes of fans online matter. They matter so much that should the Big 12 come apart, and both the ACC and SEC expand to 16, WVU will get an invite from neither. The main reason is that WVU fans online have so befouled the reputation of the sports programs they love that nobody wants to get near them.

If UConn fans get a reputation for bitterness morphing into a WVU level of hatred for the ACC, then there may be little that UConn administrators can do to overcome the new bad reputation of UConn fans.

Now if UConn were absolutely certain of an invite from the BeeOneGee, and/or the Big 12, that might not be so bad. But any potential limiting of options in this climate is not the most wise path.

STFU. bitter enough?