Of course, people writing spouting off about these things weren't too lazy to use the simple google machine, they may not report such inaccurate things as fact. What is embarrassing is when they insist on dying on such a hill. You see the same nonsense over and over again. My favorite is how the B10 members all share all of their research money.
Well, I don't mean they share data generated from research undertaken by their faculty. That all gets published and is publicly available anyway. There's no secret, exclusive academic research data sharing cabal.
The B1G has one requirement and one requirement only:
Because of that $, they can pick and choose. So if they are evaluating two equivalent schools that will bring them more $, and one is a major research institution (with AAU) membership and other isn't, they're going take the one that looks most like their existing membership. It helps sell the addition to the presidents and they can parrot all the academic bs to paper over the real motivations.
I didn’t state anything as fact - only what was being reported but you remarked as it was fact because…”I know”, but like I said…if you’re not in the room - YOU DON’T KNOW!
Emails: Wisconsin and Michigan opposed Nebraska's AAU membership
After endorsing UNL's entrance into the Big Ten -- in part because of its strong academics -- leaders at Wisconsin and Michigan apparently helped oust UNL from an elite academicjournalstar.com
"I think it would lack integrity to pretend that academics drove the process [of the Big 10 adding Nebraska]," [Wisconsin Carolyn Chancellor] Martin told the newspaper.
Martin reversed course [from her Big 10 vote to invite Nebraska]. She was a member of the [AAU] membership review committee that unanimously opposed Nebraska.
"We lost two Big Ten colleagues," [Nebraska Chancellor Havey] Perlman wrote in an April 11 email to his UNL vice chancellors while attending an AAU gathering in Washington.
"I guess I was disappointed," he said. However, he said, he respected their votes and doesn't think their votes contradicted their earlier decisions to accept UNL's entry into the Big Ten. "I am prepared to believe that they, in good faith, believed that we were a good university to join the Big Ten and that in accordance with the membership criteria of the AAU we were not eligible to continue there," he said.
Yes, I know.
And how does this change the reporting from the ESPN senior writer Andrea Anderson who wrote AAU membership is a roadblock for FSU to the Big 10. Quite frankly, I don’t care if they stay go or quit playing football altogether.Emails: Wisconsin and Michigan opposed Nebraska's AAU membership
After endorsing UNL's entrance into the Big Ten -- in part because of its strong academics -- leaders at Wisconsin and Michigan apparently helped oust UNL from an elite academic
"I think it would lack integrity to pretend that academics drove the process [of the Big 10 adding Nebraska]," [Wisconsin Carolyn Chancellor] Martin told the newspaper.
Martin reversed course [from her Big 10 vote to invite Nebraska]. She was a member of the [AAU] membership review committee that unanimously opposed Nebraska.
"We lost two Big Ten colleagues," [Nebraska Chancellor Havey] Perlman wrote in an April 11 email to his UNL vice chancellors while attending an AAU gathering in Washington.
"I guess I was disappointed," he said. However, he said, he respected their votes and doesn't think their votes contradicted their earlier decisions to accept UNL's entry into the Big Ten. "I am prepared to believe that they, in good faith, believed that we were a good university to join the Big Ten and that in accordance with the membership criteria of the AAU we were not eligible to continue there," he said.
Yes, I know.
What do you mean? They just bought a conference win for every other team in the conference.
It doesn't, but she's wrong if she stated that. If they want FSU, it won't be a roadblock. If they're luke warm about FSU, it's not going to help the Noles' cause. Just like the repeated times the B10 went after Notre Dame over the last 40 years, it isn't going to keep them from taking $omeone they want. Yes AAU status would make it easier to sell to their presidents who would vote on adding another geographic outlier; it is not a roadblock if the money is right. Institutional fit is a plus not a deciding factor unless it is so far outside the bell curve of existing members. FSU isn't enough of a outlier from other Big Ten schools for that alone to keep them out if they were a homerun financially. In fact, FSU can easily be argued to be a better school than Oregon, with better comparable metrics for both undergrad and research elements. Likely the only reason Oregon is a member of the AAU is because they got in 50+ years ago. A Boise St or WVU would always probably be too different institutionally and not just because they don't have a AAU merit badge. And this may be what you are missing: there are very good major research schools that aren't in the AAU due to legacy or some other reseason, that otherwise, institutionally, smell a lot like...and may be more productive...than AAU members. It's what I've said over and over for decades. It is actually what the Big Ten has said themselves. There is no AAU requirement, never has been despite what bloggers have bandied about and apparently has been latched onto by some media.
This of course is the most logical way to proceed, why go do research if there is someone right in front of you that knows the answer?
Paco, no disrespect, but ain't none of this no longer 'bout akademicks. It is whatever the networks tell these conferences to do, they do. If ESPN tells the ACC to add Memphis State and Wayne State, they will add those two schools. Academic standing no longer matters. At all.
If ESPN (continue to) fund the escapades accordingly then we really shouldn’t care about who they want us to add, and how bad the deal would seem to be (aka, Stanford/Cal/SMU adding no revenue to the ACC even if they take no shares at first…similar to Fox funding Oregon and Wash under the surface, one hopes ESPN provides sweetener to a similar deal here).
Since the network controls the SEC and the ACC broadcast deals, I suppose it might have a bigger picture to shuffle some of the two decks. Place the perceived higher value ACC schools like FSU, Clemson, UNC Ava Miami into the SEC; substitute the ACC loss with the low-grade dog food like Stan and Cal and SMU (and UConn, yecch). Maybe even force So Car and Van to move to the ACC? Create a true major and minor league set of schools.
The person I noted works for ESPN - guess who would be totally against an ESPN property(FSU) heading to the Big10, which we all know is everyone but ESPN? Maybe that's coming from an internal "smear" campaign, who knows.
She noted serious conversations "about" Florida State - not conversations "with" Florida State
That is a complete unknown. The AAU has traditionally moved slowly. Generally, they want to maintain a set number of institutions and not get bigger, although they have added about 10 to their total membership in the last decade+...but that is why they usually cull members before expansion: Nebraska and Syracuse before adding BU, kicking out Iowa State more recently. They also want a representative balance between public and privates, which is why they added 3 of each this last round. And privates have different standards...its just not raw numbers of research $, for instance, they look at size and the faculty and the undergrad side as well (which is why you don't have specialized institutions like UCSF as members). I can't imagine they'll just keep adding. The idea is to have a top %, not just keep growing indefinitely.
Maybe so but it is about the networks more than anything else at this point.
One man’s opinion.This is an interesting take...
Dying on the ACC vine: what will Big Ten, SEC do about FSU, Clemson, and Miami?
A source with intimate knowledge of the realignment landscape in college athletics has sent us information on what could happen in the future.www.on3.com
Highlights:
"Scenario 5: Add FSU, Clemson, and/or Miami. Despite what you may have heard elsewhere, this is by far the least desirable option for the Big 10 and it’s likely the conference would only take two of these three schools."
"Although FSU trustees banged on their conference room table last week and extolled the virtues of their own football program, most people outside Tallahassee don’t view the school in the same way. Yes, FSU has history and it did manage to reach 10 wins (with an ACC schedule) last season, but this is a .500 football program over the past seven seasons that was ready to fire its newly-hired coach a couple of seasons ago."
"Third, the new television markets offered by FSU and, especially, Clemson are relatively insignificant and the Miami market, while large, suffers from lukewarm support for its local school. The Big 10 currently owns most of the largest markets in the country and inducting two of these schools would likely dilute the revenue share to a point that current members can’t justify adding these schools."
I encourage you to read the article. It's the same things that some of us have posted.
Yes, FSU has history and it did manage to reach 10 wins (with an ACC schedule) last season,This is an interesting take...
Dying on the ACC vine: what will Big Ten, SEC do about FSU, Clemson, and Miami?
A source with intimate knowledge of the realignment landscape in college athletics has sent us information on what could happen in the future.
Highlights:
"Scenario 5: Add FSU, Clemson, and/or Miami. Despite what you may have heard elsewhere, this is by far the least desirable option for the Big 10 and it’s likely the conference would only take two of these three schools."
"Although FSU trustees banged on their conference room table last week and extolled the virtues of their own football program, most people outside Tallahassee don’t view the school in the same way. Yes, FSU has history and it did manage to reach 10 wins (with an ACC schedule) last season, but this is a .500 football program over the past seven seasons that was ready to fire its newly-hired coach a couple of seasons ago."
"Third, the new television markets offered by FSU and, especially, Clemson are relatively insignificant and the Miami market, while large, suffers from lukewarm support for its local school. The Big 10 currently owns most of the largest markets in the country and inducting two of these schools would likely dilute the revenue share to a point that current members can’t justify adding these schools."
I encourage you to read the article. It's the same things that some of us have posted.
www.ecowatch.com
Yeah it would actually fit that they’d consider something so breathtakingly stupid as criteria … 🙄One of the reasons that we are seeing a change of mind with Stanford and Cal is they bring something more then money and academics. Cal and Stanford’s carbon footprint is one of the best in the entire D1 NCAA. The ACC school presidents understand that current and future sustainability rankings are increasingly important. You will see conferences like the SEC and Big pay for their fossil fuel reliance and the conferences will actually make less money. We are bringing in two too 10 schools.
These Are the Greenest College Campuses in the U.S. [2022 Rankings] - EcoWatch
We’ve rounded up the top seven colleges for sustainability initiatives in the U.S. based on science-based studies. Click to see if yours made the list.
Yes. I have been saying this over and over. The ACC's biggest single impediment is it has too many Wake's, BC's, even Duke's, Miami's, really small private schools with small fanbase's. Oh sure Miami has more of a national brand, but I have to believe alot of the bandwagon Thug U fans have long moved on elsewhere and Duke's following is in basketball. SMU would just be another one of these.
Interesting take. I'm sure you concede that Cal and Stanford wouldn't.
Stanford is a national brand. I mean you have Elway, Christina McCaffrey, Sherman, etc...lots of NFL talent. Cal is a natural companion. Stanford/Cal game becoming property of the ACC would bring value.
