Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="TruDomGopher, post: 1292157, member: 4159"] buddy, at the same time I joined boneyard, I joined a Rutgers board--based on my belief that Rutgers and UConn were going to be in the B1G. So far, the only thing I've gotten right in realignment was Rutgers. The reason: when I was at Minnesota in the late 70's/early 80's a prof told me then that Rutgers would be in the Big Ten someday. Had nothing to do with sports and everything to do with research. There was already cooperative research back then, and Rutgers was highly respected at the Twin Cities (and I would guess by other B1G schools, too). Actually, the Nebraska add surprised me because I thought the first add would be Rutgers. And I'm sure some people think I harp too much about academics and research, but it really is important to the B1G. The B1G has regarded Rutgers as a champion for a long time--too bad it doesn't filter down to the athletic department. As for UConn--everything has to come together, and it is coming together. You should be on your knees every night thanking the Almighty that you have Herbst because she really seems to understand what needs to be done and appears to be doing everything in her power to get it done. If it weren't for the power of those UConn championships, this conversation doesn't happen. It's all important: academics and athletics feed each other. Championships [U]alone[/U] have no value to the B1G, (that's what the SEC is for) but as a piece of the puzzle in the endless chase for research money and students, they are important because of the increased exposure, make it easier for the athletic departments to fund themselves, and make it easier to sell B1G schools for research funding. But, if you ever get the chance, pull Delany aside and tell him that you don't think championships are that important to the B1G--I'd really like to know what he'd say. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach