Non-Key Tweets

[Sea Goat]

I am just discussing how they view themselves and what motivates them.

It is just not the same as other places. I am not saying it is right/wrong/indifferent.

But, it is exactly how they see things and what motivates them. It is independence itself, their self identity, more than the most cash or the best shot at the playoffs.

If it were simply about the most cash, ND would be in the Big Ten, allow advertising in the stadium, have a 125,000 seat stadium, and have had a big Jumbotron for years.

Ask Frank the Tank, he knows it well.

ND is in an enviable position. What is the total take projected each year from the ACC and NBC? Who does better then ND while still controlling the meat of their schedule and avoiding a 13th game? The ACC will require that you play 2-3 ACC away games/year. How many times will you have to go to Clemson, FSU, VT, GT etc.? It will be few and far between.

 

[UPitt]

I'm going to disagree with this. Some schools have acted more reasonably than ND in the past. ND had no business getting in the middle of the restructure in 2004 when all 8 football schools were getting ready to leave with the BCS autobid. It was ND that screwed the BE royally back then, and for what? To forcibly keep the schools together for another 7 years? It made no sense then and it did real damage to these schools, and ND didn't get anything out of it. ND should have let the football schools leave with the autobid and joined the ACC back then. And you're wrong if you believe that many schools wouldn't have done so.

ND was petty back then.

I disagree with all of this.

1. ND looked out for itself, but no more than any other school has. What about BC, VT, and Miami, or Pitt and Cuse, or any SEC team that will not let in-state schools join.

2. ND had every right to get in the middle of Big East restructure. It may have had special treatment for football, but it was an equal member of the basketball schools. The football schools had every right to walk away from ND but chose not to.

3. How did ND screw the Big East? I can argue they helped it by holding it together and allowing new additions (Ville, Cincy, USF) and Uconn (new football) to develop stronger football programs from 2004 to 2010. The P5 most likely would not have considered adding these schools in 2004, but Uconn, Cincy, and USF developed into football programs that should soon find a home i the P5.

4. You stated "ND should have let the football schools leave with the autobid and joined the ACC back then." Was the ACC really an option for the 8 remaining football schools and would the ACC have received two autobids for the BCS? I find it hard to believe that the football schools would turn down that offer.

 

[ctchamps]

I am just discussing how they view themselves and what motivates them.

It is just not the same as other places. I am not saying it is right/wrong/indifferent.

But, it is exactly how they see things and what motivates them. It is independence itself, their self identity, more than the most cash or the best shot at the playoffs.

If it were simply about the most cash, ND would be in the Big Ten, allow advertising in the stadium, have a 125,000 seat stadium, and have had a big Jumbotron for years.

Ask Frank the Tank, he knows it well.

Well we're in agreement over this.

Certainly in the past and even currently this serves ND well. But a lot of us are projecting events further down the road and I'm one who believes the ACC made a big mistake not trying to develop the northeast and develop a northeast, southeast conference that would have created a cultural rivalry. The ACC should have taken Rutgers, UConn and then perhaps Syracuse to get the most out of the northeast region in terms of potential population. The ACC instead went for glamor bb programs and then the sexy takes of ND and Ville. It was short sighted.

Maybe someday ND will be like the Ivy league and relegate it's sports to intramural status. I just don't think the alumni will be very happy about that. The university will survive on it's academic merit, but I believe the loss in $$ to the university should it's athletic situation become unimportant will be far more significant than people realize.

 

[upstater]

Well, it did help ND in 2003. It kept the BE alive for ND's other sports and kept football independent. The ACC was not offering a partial deal in 2003.

But, in this thread, ND is getting blamed for:

1) Trying to keep the conference together, and

2) Not trying to keep the conference together

...at the same time?

Question:

Why didn't the football playing schools of the Big East just use the "get out of jail free card" before 2010?

Why didn't they split from the BE basketball schools and ND without an exit fee, keep their credits and start their own all sports conference?

How did ND keep them from using this option from 2004 until 2010?

Why didn't those schools band together, get their own TV deal and agree on which schools to expand this new all sports conference with?

I have never seen any real answers to those questions anywhere.

Because of the BCS autobid.

I never blamed ND for not joining in football, so what I'm saying isn't inconsistent. Since ND didn't join, it shouldn't have mucked things up.

The problem for the football schools was losing the autobid and being relegated. That was a major problem.

 

[ctchamps]

By the way, I don't think that the ACC should wait on ND.

With 14 football members and ND as #15 for other sports, I think that they should invite UConn (#16) and a combo of Navy/Georgetown to get to 16 members in all sports to fight the Big Ten for the Northeast.

I'd get UConn and Temple. Temple is a horrible second choice to Rutgers, but I don't see any other viable options. No offense but I'd send ND packing. Your suggestion of GT and Navy to accommodate ND would make a conference that is already unbalanced far more unbalanced.

I still know the ACC is the most likely landing place for UConn outside the AAC and for bb I want to be there. But for the sake of football and the greater good of the university I want UConn in the B!G.

 

[upstater]

I disagree with all of this.

1. ND looked out for itself, but no more than any other school has. What about BC, VT, and Miami, or Pitt and Cuse, or any SEC team that will not let in-state schools join.

2. ND had every right to get in the middle of Big East restructure. It may have had special treatment for football, but it was an equal member of the basketball schools. The football schools had every right to walk away from ND but chose not to.

3. How did ND screw the Big East? I can argue they helped it by holding it together and allowing new additions (Ville, Cincy, USF) and Uconn (new football) to develop stronger football programs from 2004 to 2010. The P5 most likely would not have considered adding these schools in 2004, but Uconn, Cincy, and USF developed into football programs that should soon find a home i the P5.

4. You stated "ND should have let the football schools leave with the autobid and joined the ACC back then." Was the ACC really an option for the 8 remaining football schools and would the ACC have received two autobids for the BCS? I find it hard to believe that the football schools would turn down that offer.

Your responses are so confusing that I can only restate what I wrote. Leaving to join a better conference is one thing, but botching matters so that people can't reorganize properly is another. ND could have easily played bball with the football schools (the football schools were actually better at bball). The football schools couldn't walk away because they would have lost the BCS autobid which was contractually tied to the BE. Schools like Uconn were already admitted into the BE long before BC and the rest broke for the ACC, so ND's vote didn't impact UConn football either way. UConn would have been aligned with Pitt and West Virginia no matter what. I'm really not sure what you're asking in #4.

 

[upstater]

Yes, the state should and can support multiple flagship universities, but to this day, the four schools approach hasnt really worked in my opinion. I think it would be much better with two or three R1 schools rather than four. Four + the numerous medium sized state colleges dilutes the student body quality and inhibits the state from establishing a Berkeley, Madison, Penn State/State College or even an Ohio St/Columbus type institution.

The best students go to the four centers. Geneseo does well too, but otherwise, they are mainly at Buffalo, Binghamton and Stony Brook, with Albany a distant fourth. UB is at 30,000 students and with the billion plans to increase to 40,000. Already way bigger than medium sized state colleges. I can't see it getting much bigger. The students there are just as good as at Penn State and better than Ohio State's, though not nearly on par with Berkeley.

 

[upstater]

What did I say that is not true?

I was responding to this statement: "UConn certainly has more to offer and has a higher ceiling. Tremendous state gov't support, increasing academia prestige."

Traditionally, Buffalo has had more state support than Uconn. It's a member of the prestigious AAU. It also has an expansion plan in the billions running over the next 6 years.

I also made it explicit that I wasn't comparing athletics.

I'd agree that the MAC as a conference may be ready to pack it in, but a few schools will be looking for a soft landing somewhere, in the AAC or CUSA, for example. Buffalo is one of those schools.

No, Buffalo is not. This couldn't be further from the truth!

 

[Exit 4]

The best students go to the four centers. Geneseo does well too, but otherwise, they are mainly at Buffalo, Binghamton and Stony Brook, with Albany a distant fourth. UB is at 30,000 students and with the billion plans to increase to 40,000. Already way bigger than medium sized state colleges. I can't see it getting much bigger. The students there are just as good as at Penn State and better than Ohio State's, though not nearly on par with Berkeley.

Circling back, my contention remains that Buffalo - due to the dilution of in-state undergrad talent accross the four + 1 SUNY system, will not be able to keep pace with the improvement in UConn's academic status. In my opinion the state of CT has shown far more support over the past 20 years. Cuomo has recently committed to UB2020 - lets see what really happens. Aside from new housing, the school has been pretty quiet on the construction front for a while.

 

[Sea Goat]

I'd get UConn and Temple. Temple is a horrible second choice to Rutgers, but I don't see any other viable options. No offense but I'd send ND packing. Your suggestion of GT and Navy to accommodate ND would make a conference that is already unbalanced far more unbalanced.

I still know the ACC is the most likely landing place for UConn outside the AAC and for bb I want to be there. But for the sake of football and the greater good of the university I want UConn in the B!G.

No question - ACC is it, if that is our only way out of the gulag. The AAC (gulag) is a death sentence so we can't stay there. The B1G is the place of choice though, because the ND deal will get old and the ACC might go through a catharsis in 10 years because of it. ND last won a championship 25 years ago! Not 20 or 15 or 10 or even 5 years ago - 2f..ing5 years ago. It made it to the BCS game last year and got routed by 'Bama. It's now a part time member of the ACC with likes of FSU and Miami who have won multiple football championships since ND last won a title. This isn't the old half-assed BE. The football powers of the ACC won't accept the ND special deal long term unless ND shows it is worthy on the field. The full ACC members will still have a difficult time with it because they will have to win the 13th game of the season to get into the playoffs. ND will be exempt from such a requirement. IMO, this will ultimately create resentment. UConn should want to be as far away from that situation as possible and hope for a spot in the B1G.

 

[upstater]

Circling back, my contention remains that Buffalo - due to the dilution of in-state undergrad talent accross the four + 1 SUNY system, will not be able to keep pace with the improvement in UConn's academic status. In my opinion the state of CT has shown far more support over the past 20 years. Cuomo has recently committed to UB2020 - lets see what really happens. Aside from new housing, the school has been pretty quiet on the construction front for a while.

A lot of new buildings have gone up over the last decade. A lot of them. These are just three. The school really is building out. UB2020 sounds just like what UConn is doing. Look at the links below:

http://www.buffalo.edu/buildings/building?id=alfiero
http://www.bioinformatics.buffalo.edu/
http://www.buffalo.edu/buildings/building (Click on Davis Hall)

The key measure to compare state support should be cost per student from taxpayer, and Buffalo's right now is 2x UConn's. This is why Buffalo's tuition was under $5,000 until last year. Despite much heavier research expenditures at Buffalo.

 

[Exit 4]

A lot of new buildings have gone up over the last decade. A lot of them. These are just three. The school really is building out. UB2020 sounds just like what UConn is doing. Look at the links below:

http://www.buffalo.edu/buildings/building?id=alfiero
http://www.bioinformatics.buffalo.edu/
http://www.buffalo.edu/buildings/building (Click on Davis Hall)

The key measure to compare state support should be cost per student from taxpayer, and Buffalo's right now is 2x UConn's. This is why Buffalo's tuition was under $5,000 until last year. Despite much heavier research expenditures at Buffalo.

two of these projects are rather small. the bio buildings is impressive. the state's level of subsidy is also impressive....the inability to boost its standing in the undergrad world is not impressive.

 

[upstater]

two of these projects are rather small. the bio buildings is impressive. the state's level of subsidy is also impressive....the inability to boost its standing in the undergrad world is not impressive.

In the latest NRC report, more UB programs rose into the top 10 than ever before. It is actually coming up. Not sure what you mean by undergrad world, but the metrics for top 10% grads and SATs are higher than ever and on par with top publics. But that's going on everywhere.

The Bioinformatics building was $300 million, Davis Hall $75 million. I left out other buildings like this one: http://www.buffaloctrc.org/ It cost $118m. I think these are pretty big buildings. They have a medical school going up this coming year. They've been saving for that one. It's going to be a doozy. $375m. That's 4 buildings at almost $900 million.

Personally, I put a lot more stock in the NRC rankings than USNews. UB student SATs are par with AAU state schools, the mean is 1200 in SATs. UConn is at 1220. Not that big a difference. I actually left a top private school to teach in my field because the program at UB was top 10 nationally.

 

[Husky25]

Traditionally, Buffalo has had more state support than Uconn. It's a member of the prestigious AAU. It also has an expansion plan in the billions running over the next 6 years.

I also made it explicit that I wasn't comparing athletics.
No, Buffalo is not. This couldn't be further from the truth!

1. Buffalo went Division 1A in football even before UConn. I thought, my perception that is, is that they were more committed than you are letting on...Again that is only my perception.

2. I wasn't really comparing NY support of Buffalo to Connecticut's support of UConn (Though I can understand how you interpreted that way). I was saying that UConn is well supported by its state's Government and that the academic level is increasing, without any regard to Buffalo. Both are true. UConn 2000, 21st Century UConn, and Faculty 500 all point to this and that UConn is taking serious aim at AAU status. According to UConn's Wikipedia page, UConn is considered a Public Ivy, whatever that means. But according to USNWR, UConn ranks in the low 20's for public universities in the country, and in the low 60 for universities as a whole. Buffalo comes in at 51 and 106, respectively. I kind of take this with a grain of salt, given AAU status, but I think UConn's initiatives are properly prioritized.

Finally...make no mistake that the Big Ten is an athletic conference, first and foremost. While there is no doubt that some academic alliances and prestige have come out of the organization, the principle purpose was to make scheduling and travel between athletic programs easier in the pre-aviation age. To that end, athletics should always be considered.

 

[B1GALUM]

I'd agree that the MAC as a conference may be ready to pack it in, but a few schools will be looking for a soft landing somewhere, in the AAC or CUSA, for example. Buffalo is one of those schools.

Buffalo is not an athletic fit with the B1G.

However, Buffalo is attempting to improve their athletics and will not pack it in as you mentioned.

UB athletics has created a strategic plan to attempt to improve their athletics and a Shareholders Society to boost donations to athletics.

It remains to be seen whether this is successful. However, to their credit, they are least trying to improve athletics at their university.

A few quotes of note from these documents.

"The University at Buffalo Department of Athletics has released a new comprehensive strategic plan that culminates several months of extensive self review. The plan outlines UB’s athletic vision, mission, core values and the seven pillars of success.
Since UB Director of Athletics Danny White was hired last June, he and his staff have aggressively outlined their goal to build the brand of UB Athletics and strengthen the national profile of New York’s premier public institution. This is the next step in the process.
The plan is a collective vision of the coaches and staff at UB and its goal is to deliver the very best student-athlete experience possible and bring big-time college athletics to Western New York."
http://www.buffalobulls.com/strategic_plan/index


"We have an aggressive vision for the future of this department. As an AAU institution, and the largest, most comprehensive public university in the state of New York, we want to strengthen UBs national profile through excellence in intercollegiate athletics"
http://issuu.com/buffalobulls/docs/strategic_plan?e=7767616/4115106


"We will become the preeminent, flagship athletic department for the state of New York by fostering an environment for big time college athletics in the WNY community and the state at large."
http://www.bullsblueandwhite.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=255&Itemid=212


"OUR GOALS ARE BIG, OUR STRATEGY IS SIMPLE. Provide as many opportunities for investment as possible and give our alumni, friends and fans the opportunity to take ownership of the most promising athletics program in the country."
http://www.bullsblueandwhite.com/downloads/Shareholders-Society-Pledge.pdf

 

[Adios]

1. Buffalo went Division 1A in football even before UConn. I thought, my perception that is, is that they were more committed than you are letting on...Again that is only my perception.

Incorrect. They both went FBS in 1999. Buffalo was D3 between 1977 and 1992.

 

[Husky25]

Incorrect. They both went FBS in 1999. Buffalo was D3 between 1977 and 1992.

UConn played in D1AA playoffs following the 1998 regular season and went 4-7 in the A-10 in 1999. They were a D1A transition program in 2000 & 2001. UConn was not Fully Div. 1a until 2002, when they were Independent in 2002, &'03. They were supposed to be Independent in 2004 as well, but the defections prompted the Big East to pull that up by a year.

 

[upstater]

1. Buffalo went Division 1A in football even before UConn. I thought, my perception that is, is that they were more committed than you are letting on...Again that is only my perception.

2. I wasn't really comparing NY support of Buffalo to Connecticut's support of UConn (Though I can understand how you interpreted that way). I was saying that UConn is well supported by its state's Government and that the academic level is increasing, without any regard to Buffalo. Both are true. UConn 2000, 21st Century UConn, and Faculty 500 all point to this and that UConn is taking serious aim at AAU status. According to UConn's Wikipedia page, UConn is considered a Public Ivy, whatever that means. But according to USNWR, UConn ranks in the low 20's for public universities in the country, and in the low 60 for universities as a whole. Buffalo comes in at 51 and 106, respectively. I kind of take this with a grain of salt, given AAU status, but I think UConn's initiatives are properly prioritized.

Finally...make no mistake that the Big Ten is an athletic conference, first and foremost. While there is no doubt that some academic alliances and prestige have come out of the organization, the principle purpose was to make scheduling and travel between athletic programs easier in the pre-aviation age. To that end, athletics should always be considered.

You don't have to convince me that athletic conferences have little regard for academics. I've been saying this for awhile. I'm just throwing cold water on the idea that Buffalo has intentions to continue pushing the boulder uphill when it comes to football. As for USNWR, I gave it little credence when I taught at a top 30 university, and I give it little credence now. Uconn is getting a late start on the academic side but it is ramping up quickly.

 

[upstater]

Buffalo is not an athletic fit with the B1G.

However, Buffalo is attempting to improve their athletics and will not pack it in as you mentioned.

UB athletics has created a strategic plan to attempt to improve their athletics and a Shareholders Society to boost donations to athletics.

It remains to be seen whether this is successful. However, to their credit, they are least trying to improve athletics at their university.

A few quotes of note from these documents.

"The University at Buffalo Department of Athletics has released a new comprehensive strategic plan that culminates several months of extensive self review. The plan outlines UB’s athletic vision, mission, core values and the seven pillars of success.
Since UB Director of Athletics Danny White was hired last June, he and his staff have aggressively outlined their goal to build the brand of UB Athletics and strengthen the national profile of New York’s premier public institution. This is the next step in the process.
The plan is a collective vision of the coaches and staff at UB and its goal is to deliver the very best student-athlete experience possible and bring big-time college athletics to Western New York."
http://www.buffalobulls.com/strategic_plan/index


"We have an aggressive vision for the future of this department. As an AAU institution, and the largest, most comprehensive public university in the state of New York, we want to strengthen UBs national profile through excellence in intercollegiate athletics"
http://issuu.com/buffalobulls/docs/strategic_plan?e=7767616/4115106


"We will become the preeminent, flagship athletic department for the state of New York by fostering an environment for big time college athletics in the WNY community and the state at large."
http://www.bullsblueandwhite.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=255&Itemid=212


"OUR GOALS ARE BIG, OUR STRATEGY IS SIMPLE. Provide as many opportunities for investment as possible and give our alumni, friends and fans the opportunity to take ownership of the most promising athletics program in the country."
http://www.bullsblueandwhite.com/downloads/Shareholders-Society-Pledge.pdf

If there was an emoticon for rolling the eyes, guffawing, and throwing up at the same time, I would have posted it.

 

[btstimpy]

I'd get UConn and Temple. Temple is a horrible second choice to Rutgers, but I don't see any other viable options. No offense but I'd send ND packing. Your suggestion of GT and Navy to accommodate ND would make a conference that is already unbalanced far more unbalanced.

I still know the ACC is the most likely landing place for UConn outside the AAC and for bb I want to be there. But for the sake of football and the greater good of the university I want UConn in the B!G.

UConn and Temple is what I'd like to see them do. I don't like the idea of Georgetown/Navy. That is way too much like the Big East and recipe for problems. We're already made a Big East type move with the ND deal. That's enough. I prefer the Philadelphia market to the Cincinnati one. Pittsburgh won't deliver the Philadelphia area. Temple could with some marketing work and top flight coaches.

 

[huskymedic]

LMAO... you have to laugh!

theDudeofWV 4:13pm via web
UB AD Danny White says no contact between UB and the B1G but asks me if I have Delany's phone number.

theDudeofWV 4:14pm via web
I told him no. But I have Swoffords's on the caller ID. Swofford keeps prank calling me & saying "GoR Dude! Abide That!"

He's no different than our dearly departed HFD (just cleaner language).

 

[ctchamps]

UConn and Temple is what I'd like to see them do. I don't like the idea of Georgetown/Navy. That is way too much like the Big East and recipe for problems. We're already made a Big East type move with the ND deal. That's enough. I prefer the Philadelphia market to the Cincinnati one. Pittsburgh won't deliver the Philadelphia area. Temple could with some marketing work and top flight coaches.

You and I disagree on essentially only two things. Otherwise we're in lockstep with one another.

First is that RU was and will always be a better choice than Temple for the ACC. RU will have the state support of NJ far more than Temple will get Pennsylvania support. And that will be significant in the future! Can the ACC make Temple work. Certainly. But they would be going against stronger inertia with Temple than Rutgers.

Second point is I would eject ND asap. I have nothing against the Irish. It's just they will always hold out the carrot that will prevent the ACC from being proactive. The longer they stay in this arrangement the harder it will be for the ACC to say it made a mistake. Happened to the BE. Although the BE's problems were different than the ACC this was a significant problem for the BE that the ACC has in common.

 

[upstater]

You and I disagree on essentially only two things. Otherwise we're in lockstep with one another.

First is that RU was and will always be a better choice than Temple for the ACC. RU will have the state support of NJ far more than Temple will get Pennsylvania support. And that will be significant in the future! Can the ACC make Temple work. Certainly. But they would be going against stronger inertia with Temple than Rutgers.

Second point is I would eject ND asap. I have nothing against the Irish. It's just they will always hold out the carrot that will prevent the ACC from being proactive. The longer they stay in this arrangement the harder it will be for the ACC to say it made a mistake. Happened to the BE. Although the BE's problems were different than the ACC this was a significant problem for the BE that the ACC has in common.

Here's the big question: a decade ago, the ND administration and AD gave the B1G a tentative yes.

The alumni and boosters revolted. The whole show was taken to a chalet in France. Afterward, ND came out and told the B1g, thanks but no thanks. Why did ND's alum and boosters revolt? Because the school prizes its independence.

What does the ACC allow ND? Independence in football.

Now, can anyone swear that, if the D4 rules demanded conference affiliation, that ND's administration, having overcome any booster or alumni complaints because of the new dictates, would prefer the ACC to the B1G, when the administration chose to join the B1G a decade ago?

 

[ctchamps]

Here's the big question: a decade ago, the ND administration and AD gave the B1G a tentative yes.

The alumni and boosters revolted. The whole show was taken to a chalet in France. Afterward, ND came out and told the B1g, thanks but no thanks. Why did ND's alum and boosters revolt? Because the school prizes its independence.

What does the ACC allow ND? Independence in football.

Now, can anyone swear that, if the D4 rules demanded conference affiliation, that ND's administration, having overcome any booster or alumni complaints because of the new dictates, would prefer the ACC to the B1G, when the administration chose to join the B1G a decade ago?

That's the B!G question and the consequence that a lack of foresight can create. I guess at the time of the Big Ten rejection there was no clue what we see now. But things are different for ND and the ACC because they have the history of the past ten years to realize that holding onto past paradigms can be destructive.

 

[btstimpy]

Here's the big question: a decade ago, the ND administration and AD gave the B1G a tentative yes.

The alumni and boosters revolted. The whole show was taken to a chalet in France. Afterward, ND came out and told the B1g, thanks but no thanks. Why did ND's alum and boosters revolt? Because the school prizes its independence.

What does the ACC allow ND? Independence in football.

Now, can anyone swear that, if the D4 rules demanded conference affiliation, that ND's administration, having overcome any booster or alumni complaints because of the new dictates, would prefer the ACC to the B1G, when the administration chose to join the B1G a decade ago?

Jack Swarbrick and Father John Jenkins would prefer the ACC, and they have both said so.

You seem to be having trouble believing that this decision has been made by Notre Dame. Notre Dame will tell you it has, and they have committed themselves.