Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
For Those Who Have Said K-State & Ok-State & WVU aren't really worthwhile additions
Author Message
tcufrog86 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,167
Joined: Nov 2006
Reputation: 101
I Root For: TCU & Wisconsin
Location: Minnesota Uff da
Post: #41
RE: For Those Who Have Said K-State & Ok-State & WVU aren't really worthwhile ...
(07-21-2017 09:36 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  
(07-21-2017 08:32 AM)tcufrog86 Wrote:  Waco has definitely improved a lot in the last 5 to 7 years, being pretty much smack dab between downtown Fort Worth and downtown Austin puts them relatively close to a lot of population growth.

There are almost 9MM people within a 200 mile radius of Waco.

200 miles is too big a radius. Almost every ACC team is in the multi-millions if you use a net that big! I'd think 100 miles, tops.

IMO, Baylor is the redundant Big XII team in Texas. It should've been Houston, IMO.

If the ACC were forced to take 2 other Texas teams in addition to Texas (hypothetically), I'd want those to be TCU and Houston... again, JMO.

I was actually looking at km accidentally on the tool I was using. Within 100 miles of Waco there about 6.5MM people.

I'm not arguing for or against the inclusion of Baylor in any league, as a TCU fan i'm completely fine with that university ceasing to exist. Just providing some color as to why Waco is seeing a fair amount of development in recent years.

I would think if any conference expanded into Texas they would likely only take 1 private school and my opinion (although bias) is that TCU offers more than Baylor to a league such as the ACC.
07-21-2017 11:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,888
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #42
RE: For Those Who Have Said K-State & Ok-State & WVU aren't really worthwhile ...
(07-21-2017 11:57 AM)tcufrog86 Wrote:  
(07-21-2017 09:36 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  
(07-21-2017 08:32 AM)tcufrog86 Wrote:  Waco has definitely improved a lot in the last 5 to 7 years, being pretty much smack dab between downtown Fort Worth and downtown Austin puts them relatively close to a lot of population growth.

There are almost 9MM people within a 200 mile radius of Waco.

200 miles is too big a radius. Almost every ACC team is in the multi-millions if you use a net that big! I'd think 100 miles, tops.

IMO, Baylor is the redundant Big XII team in Texas. It should've been Houston, IMO.

If the ACC were forced to take 2 other Texas teams in addition to Texas (hypothetically), I'd want those to be TCU and Houston... again, JMO.

I was actually looking at km accidentally on the tool I was using. Within 100 miles of Waco there about 6.5MM people.

I'm not arguing for or against the inclusion of Baylor in any league, as a TCU fan i'm completely fine with that university ceasing to exist. Just providing some color as to why Waco is seeing a fair amount of development in recent years.

I would think if any conference expanded into Texas they would likely only take 1 private school and my opinion (although bias) is that TCU offers more than Baylor to a league such as the ACC.

4 years ago I would have slightly disagreed with you in as much as Baylor is the oldest University in Texas and had some cachet on its own. Today, you are absolutely right. Right now Baylor is too toxic to be considered and in part that's not just the public perception, or the legal reality, but also the disassociation of many of its fans.

T.C.U. is now the superior choice in every metric. It was a strong option 4 years ago. Today it is probably the only private option that is viable. Rice has the academic hammer, but a T.C.U. athletic department that can gross in excess of 90 million is testimony enough.
07-21-2017 01:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hokie Mark Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,727
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 1392
I Root For: VT, ACC teams
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #43
RE: For Those Who Have Said K-State & Ok-State & WVU aren't really worthwhile ...
(07-21-2017 01:26 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(07-21-2017 11:57 AM)tcufrog86 Wrote:  
(07-21-2017 09:36 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  
(07-21-2017 08:32 AM)tcufrog86 Wrote:  Waco has definitely improved a lot in the last 5 to 7 years, being pretty much smack dab between downtown Fort Worth and downtown Austin puts them relatively close to a lot of population growth.

There are almost 9MM people within a 200 mile radius of Waco.

200 miles is too big a radius. Almost every ACC team is in the multi-millions if you use a net that big! I'd think 100 miles, tops.

IMO, Baylor is the redundant Big XII team in Texas. It should've been Houston, IMO.

If the ACC were forced to take 2 other Texas teams in addition to Texas (hypothetically), I'd want those to be TCU and Houston... again, JMO.

I was actually looking at km accidentally on the tool I was using. Within 100 miles of Waco there about 6.5MM people.

I'm not arguing for or against the inclusion of Baylor in any league, as a TCU fan i'm completely fine with that university ceasing to exist. Just providing some color as to why Waco is seeing a fair amount of development in recent years.

I would think if any conference expanded into Texas they would likely only take 1 private school and my opinion (although bias) is that TCU offers more than Baylor to a league such as the ACC.

4 years ago I would have slightly disagreed with you in as much as Baylor is the oldest University in Texas and had some cachet on its own. Today, you are absolutely right. Right now Baylor is too toxic to be considered and in part that's not just the public perception, or the legal reality, but also the disassociation of many of its fans.

T.C.U. is now the superior choice in every metric. It was a strong option 4 years ago. Today it is probably the only private option that is viable. Rice has the academic hammer, but a T.C.U. athletic department that can gross in excess of 90 million is testimony enough.

It's rarely mentioned, but IIRC, TCU has WAY more football tradition/history than Baylor (or Texas Tech, maybe even more than Texas A&M). Doesn't TCU has a national championship back in the day?
07-21-2017 03:22 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
tcufrog86 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,167
Joined: Nov 2006
Reputation: 101
I Root For: TCU & Wisconsin
Location: Minnesota Uff da
Post: #44
RE: For Those Who Have Said K-State & Ok-State & WVU aren't really worthwhile ...
(07-21-2017 03:22 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  
(07-21-2017 01:26 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(07-21-2017 11:57 AM)tcufrog86 Wrote:  
(07-21-2017 09:36 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  
(07-21-2017 08:32 AM)tcufrog86 Wrote:  Waco has definitely improved a lot in the last 5 to 7 years, being pretty much smack dab between downtown Fort Worth and downtown Austin puts them relatively close to a lot of population growth.

There are almost 9MM people within a 200 mile radius of Waco.

200 miles is too big a radius. Almost every ACC team is in the multi-millions if you use a net that big! I'd think 100 miles, tops.

IMO, Baylor is the redundant Big XII team in Texas. It should've been Houston, IMO.

If the ACC were forced to take 2 other Texas teams in addition to Texas (hypothetically), I'd want those to be TCU and Houston... again, JMO.

I was actually looking at km accidentally on the tool I was using. Within 100 miles of Waco there about 6.5MM people.

I'm not arguing for or against the inclusion of Baylor in any league, as a TCU fan i'm completely fine with that university ceasing to exist. Just providing some color as to why Waco is seeing a fair amount of development in recent years.

I would think if any conference expanded into Texas they would likely only take 1 private school and my opinion (although bias) is that TCU offers more than Baylor to a league such as the ACC.

4 years ago I would have slightly disagreed with you in as much as Baylor is the oldest University in Texas and had some cachet on its own. Today, you are absolutely right. Right now Baylor is too toxic to be considered and in part that's not just the public perception, or the legal reality, but also the disassociation of many of its fans.

T.C.U. is now the superior choice in every metric. It was a strong option 4 years ago. Today it is probably the only private option that is viable. Rice has the academic hammer, but a T.C.U. athletic department that can gross in excess of 90 million is testimony enough.

It's rarely mentioned, but IIRC, TCU has WAY more football tradition/history than Baylor (or Texas Tech, maybe even more than Texas A&M). Doesn't TCU has a national championship back in the day?

Yep, TCU has a pretty good history...i'd probably put it top 30 - 40 or so all time.

- AP poll national title in 1938 and 10 total AP top 10 finishes
- a Heisman winner, and 5 others finishing top 5 in voting
- 18 conference titles
- 32 bowl appearances
- one of only a handful of schools to have played in the Rose, Sugar, Cotton, Orange, Fiesta, and Peach Bowls
- 11 college football hall of fame inductees

On top of that, we've had a super bowl MVP, NFL MVP, and 3 NFL hall of fame inductees
(This post was last modified: 07-21-2017 03:31 PM by tcufrog86.)
07-21-2017 03:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #45
RE: For Those Who Have Said K-State & Ok-State & WVU aren't really worthwhile additions
That TCU team with Andy Dalton, that won the Rose Bowl ... that was a dang good team. And they did that without being in the P5.
07-21-2017 03:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,888
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #46
RE: For Those Who Have Said K-State & Ok-State & WVU aren't really worthwhile ...
(07-21-2017 03:39 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  That TCU team with Andy Dalton, that won the Rose Bowl ... that was a dang good team. And they did that without being in the P5.

I know all of that boys. But the point I was making is that Baylor as the oldest university in the state of Texas had money, influence, and cachet before they trashed it.

Both T.C.U. and S.M.U. have more success to their pedigree, but Baylor had more pedigree historically before they started obliterating their reputation with the basketball murder and then the rapes. That was the point I was making.

That said T.C.U. is now by far the best positioned of the Texas privates. IMO, Houston, as a public, could be viable as well, to the right conference.
(This post was last modified: 07-21-2017 04:26 PM by JRsec.)
07-21-2017 04:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #47
RE: For Those Who Have Said K-State & Ok-State & WVU aren't really worthwhile additions
I was just adding on to tcu's post #44.

In fact, I pretty much agreed with what you've said JR, in post #40
07-21-2017 04:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,358
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 357
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #48
RE: For Those Who Have Said K-State & Ok-State & WVU aren't really worthwhile additions
TCU has definitely skyrocketed up the pecking order in Texas and has the potential to be the Miami of Texas. Great location, great facilities, great coaches.

The only major knock is that TCU is not a research school. It's focus is still primarily undergrad education. To me that's not a problem, I got a great education there with small classes taught by great profs, but I realize that in the university rankings game, doctoral research focused schools that shaft the undergrads is all that matters.
07-21-2017 09:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #49
RE: For Those Who Have Said K-State & Ok-State & WVU aren't really worthwhile additions
Shaft the undergrads? Whatever

There are some P5 that don't have much of a grad/research program, that are just fine.
07-22-2017 09:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,358
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 357
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #50
RE: For Those Who Have Said K-State & Ok-State & WVU aren't really worthwhile ...
(07-22-2017 09:57 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Shaft the undergrads? Whatever

There are some P5 that don't have much of a grad/research program, that are just fine.

There are but it goes by what conferences want in new members.

The B1G and PAC are all about research schools and won't add any non-research school not named Notre Dame.

The ACC is a blend of research and undergrad schools and has shown it's not above adding undergrads who bring something they want to the table

The SEC favors big state research schools but would also not be above adding someone like TCU who brings something they want (more DFW exposure)
07-22-2017 05:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,175
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 679
I Root For: tOSU SJSU Stan'
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #51
RE: For Those Who Have Said K-State & Ok-State & WVU aren't really worthwhile additions
The one thing to remember is ESPN (maybe also FOX) went to bat for West Virginia to get the Big 12 to 10. They ranked them ahead of Louisville, whom they backed for the ACC to replace Maryland.

OK State's value is close to zero without bedlam. They fall to K State level as a property. (One wonders what the value of schools like Mississippi State, Auburn, and Oregon State would be if they were not in the same conference as their flagship brothers for their Turkey week battles.) OK State, K State and Iowa State are all the 2nd schools and don;t carry the flag of the state and the pride of it (Auburn and Washington State are very similar in that respect).

Two schools not in the OP, who also should be examined are Texas Tech and Iowa State. Iowa State is academically very solid, on par with Nebraska, OU and KU -actually slightly above these. Texas Tech is not a valuable property that I can see. They are far down the pecking order in Texas, and like Washington State is in Pullman and not Seattle, they are in Lubbock far from the economic engine cities of Texas, DFW, Austin, and Houston. They don;t even have a big rivalry anyone can think of in the B12. Texas vs TCU is a bigger game (though a poor substitute for the lost A&M game).

What all these schools have is significant P5 infrastructure in place. This was 50% of the separation of Louisville from Cincy and UConn when the ACC came calling (the other 50% was a much more rabid fan base). K State and OK State have solid fan bases, just not as massive as others.

The value of these schools is probably more political, as the infrastructures make them "ready to go" for the other power conferences to absorb. G5 schools, even the highest up the food chain, are almost certainly looking at a long slog up hill to build the infrastructures. Many of them would resemble Rutgers in their transition. Schools like Houston, Cincy and UConn are carrying massive debt to keep up athletics. Those are red flags for the power conferences, since they be asking them to add another $20-25M a year onto their budgets. This makes an existing P5 member much more attractive, even a K State or Texas Tech.

West Virginia stands out as carrying the flag of their state, no matter that it is a small state like Nebraska. Their following is passionate. They have several natural rivals in the ACC, such as Pitt, Virginia and Virginia Tech. ESPN saw their value when Missouri needed to be replaced. If ESPN goes to bat for them again, it could be hard for the ACC to refuse. This is the only path I see for them out of the B12. The value here is real and stronger than the others on a stand alone. And they may have a major backer in ESPN.

The value of OK State is as a bargaining chip for OU. The B1G wont take OK State, but the SEC would to get OU, and the P12 very well might if part of a package that also brought in Texas and OU (building a Texas based division). Texas Tech's value is strictly as a "drag along" school in Texas should the Longhorns opt for the P12 (It'd be a P16) which would require other Texas schools. TCU might even be ahead of Tech in this, because they are in the valuable DFW, and they hold higher admission standards even though they are not a research school (they do hold R2); Tech may hold R1, but they are not much distinguishable for OK State either, and they are in nowheresville (Lubbock). But again if only Texas opts to go West, and OU goes SEC or B1G, then they could be dragging both Tech and TCU with them. If they drag only one, TCU might even be ahead of Tech.

K State is the one in the worst position (besides Baylor, who created their own mess). Not because they are any worse than West Virginia, Texas Tech or OK State --they are not-- but because KU, their state flagship, is not strong enough to have the clout to bring them with them. The B1G is more likely to grab Iowa State as a 2nd school with KU than K State. (IMO the real competition for a 16th if only KU goes to the B1G is between ISU and UConn ... assuming Texas joins another conference; but if Texas goes Indy in Football or stays in the B12, the B1G may well sit on 15 and wait them out, much like they took PSU and waited even decades to get the right 12th; this is a conference that wont let something like scheduling issues dictate a bad addition).

Anyway the value of theses 2nd schools is more political and tied to the fortunes and decisions of their State flagships - or in West Virginia's case the level of desire ESPN has to protect them, or not.
07-24-2017 12:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,175
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 679
I Root For: tOSU SJSU Stan'
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #52
RE: For Those Who Have Said K-State & Ok-State & WVU aren't really worthwhile additions
Just one final thought. Schools left behind in the rump of the B12 would really struggle. Almost certainly the TV/Media revenue would drop 50% in 2025 without the likes of OU and Texas in the league (and probably a couple others). These are not programs running huge surpluses, so they would have to find ways to cut their budgets $10-15M a year to survive the economic reality as a "Big East 2004-12" era semi-power conference. The impact could be even worse if they lose all power status (depends on how many leave, if 5 go they will lose that status, if 3 or 4 then 50-50), as we may be talking about schools needing to reduce the budgets closer to $20M a year. That would in very short order see the quality of their programs drop significantly.

I think the impact would see almost all new facility upgrades come to a screeching halt, with donations redirected to sustain their existing programs. After about 5 years or so the gap between them and the other power conferences will be quite significant and show up in the product. But like the old Big East, a couple programs will stand out and maybe get a call from one of the other conferences. For whatever reason the number of power schools has been in the 60-66 range for decades. I suspect it has to do with media market saturation, 30 game to pick from a week, 15 good ones, for the networks to air and get decent ratings.

Anyway, losing power status could put these programs with strong infrastructures on a path like what happened to Rice, Houston, and SMU after the SWC broke up.
07-24-2017 01:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,888
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #53
RE: For Those Who Have Said K-State & Ok-State & WVU aren't really worthwhile ...
(07-24-2017 12:28 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  The one thing to remember is ESPN (maybe also FOX) went to bat for West Virginia to get the Big 12 to 10. They ranked them ahead of Louisville, whom they backed for the ACC to replace Maryland.

OK State's value is close to zero without bedlam. They fall to K State level as a property. (One wonders what the value of schools like Mississippi State, Auburn, and Oregon State would be if they were not in the same conference as their flagship brothers for their Turkey week battles.) OK State, K State and Iowa State are all the 2nd schools and don;t carry the flag of the state and the pride of it (Auburn and Washington State are very similar in that respect).

Two schools not in the OP, who also should be examined are Texas Tech and Iowa State. Iowa State is academically very solid, on par with Nebraska, OU and KU -actually slightly above these. Texas Tech is not a valuable property that I can see. They are far down the pecking order in Texas, and like Washington State is in Pullman and not Seattle, they are in Lubbock far from the economic engine cities of Texas, DFW, Austin, and Houston. They don;t even have a big rivalry anyone can think of in the B12. Texas vs TCU is a bigger game (though a poor substitute for the lost A&M game).

What all these schools have is significant P5 infrastructure in place. This was 50% of the separation of Louisville from Cincy and UConn when the ACC came calling (the other 50% was a much more rabid fan base). K State and OK State have solid fan bases, just not as massive as others.

The value of these schools is probably more political, as the infrastructures make them "ready to go" for the other power conferences to absorb. G5 schools, even the highest up the food chain, are almost certainly looking at a long slog up hill to build the infrastructures. Many of them would resemble Rutgers in their transition. Schools like Houston, Cincy and UConn are carrying massive debt to keep up athletics. Those are red flags for the power conferences, since they be asking them to add another $20-25M a year onto their budgets. This makes an existing P5 member much more attractive, even a K State or Texas Tech.

West Virginia stands out as carrying the flag of their state, no matter that it is a small state like Nebraska. Their following is passionate. They have several natural rivals in the ACC, such as Pitt, Virginia and Virginia Tech. ESPN saw their value when Missouri needed to be replaced. If ESPN goes to bat for them again, it could be hard for the ACC to refuse. This is the only path I see for them out of the B12. The value here is real and stronger than the others on a stand alone. And they may have a major backer in ESPN.

The value of OK State is as a bargaining chip for OU. The B1G wont take OK State, but the SEC would to get OU, and the P12 very well might if part of a package that also brought in Texas and OU (building a Texas based division). Texas Tech's value is strictly as a "drag along" school in Texas should the Longhorns opt for the P12 (It'd be a P16) which would require other Texas schools. TCU might even be ahead of Tech in this, because they are in the valuable DFW, and they hold higher admission standards even though they are not a research school (they do hold R2); Tech may hold R1, but they are not much distinguishable for OK State either, and they are in nowheresville (Lubbock). But again if only Texas opts to go West, and OU goes SEC or B1G, then they could be dragging both Tech and TCU with them. If they drag only one, TCU might even be ahead of Tech.

K State is the one in the worst position (besides Baylor, who created their own mess). Not because they are any worse than West Virginia, Texas Tech or OK State --they are not-- but because KU, their state flagship, is not strong enough to have the clout to bring them with them. The B1G is more likely to grab Iowa State as a 2nd school with KU than K State. (IMO the real competition for a 16th if only KU goes to the B1G is between ISU and UConn ... assuming Texas joins another conference; but if Texas goes Indy in Football or stays in the B12, the B1G may well sit on 15 and wait them out, much like they took PSU and waited even decades to get the right 12th; this is a conference that wont let something like scheduling issues dictate a bad addition).

Anyway the value of theses 2nd schools is more political and tied to the fortunes and decisions of their State flagships - or in West Virginia's case the level of desire ESPN has to protect them, or not.

One need not wonder about Auburn. It has a top 20 winning percentage all time, and consistently finishes in the top 10-12 earners in the nation. It's been around for a long long time, and if it had been assigned medicine and law instead of agriculture, veterinary medicine, and engineering as disciplines it would be the other way around. It is the height of ignorance to assume that it wouldn't do fine on its own. We've produced astronauts (Mattingly and Voss come to mind), the CEO of Apple is one of our alums, but sadly we don't get credit from the academic clubs for medical research done at the Vet School, even though it advances human medicine.

And while you tout WVU I have to wonder if you have any understanding of why Mississippi is rated as low as it is, which is still higher than WVU? Like the Mountaineers they were tasked by their state to educate their people to fill essential job roles within the state. They have Vet Med as well. You and so many others think that schools like these don't matter, or at least it is implied in your post. They matter a great deal to Mississippi in the same way that West Virginia matters. Both schools have research, but the primary emphasis for both is undergraduate education. And historically many schools in the South had their disciplines divided by mandate in the constitutions that were implemented during reconstruction. It took time for some of those provisions to be rewritten. It is why privates in the South were more likely to become AAU research schools than the publics. In many ways the public are just starting to make inroads with research classifications.

Time, demographic shifts, and representation in the House will eventually turn the tide on some of these matters.

But an athletic department that grosses over 130 million, that consistently puts 86,000+ butts in the seats at the stadium, was part of John Heisman's coaching legacy, has been playing football since 1892, and is top 20 in all time wins isn't a program that "one would wonder if they would make it without their big brother" kind of program. Mississippi State is decent enough that if they hadn't been historically a founding member of the SEC would have made just fine on their own as well. I don't know enough about Oregon State to comment, but I suspect they are in the PAC because of historical ties as well.
(This post was last modified: 07-24-2017 01:51 PM by JRsec.)
07-24-2017 01:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #54
RE: For Those Who Have Said K-State & Ok-State & WVU aren't really worthwhile additions
Professional degrees like business, management, and law, don't produce lots of research dollars.

It's mostly medical that gets the big dollars, and so in Alabama that means UAB is the top research school in the state.
07-24-2017 01:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,175
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 679
I Root For: tOSU SJSU Stan'
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #55
RE: For Those Who Have Said K-State & Ok-State & WVU aren't really worthwhile additions
Auburn would be in trouble if it were not in the SEC.

They are a R2 school, not the research school. Athletics and being a member of the SEC is what they have going for them. They are not a Purdue or Georgia Tech, where top Scientists, Students and researchers flock.

JRsec, I think you focus too much on the sports side, and don't step back and ask, in a vacuum, without the Iron Bowl, what is Auburn's stand alone value? The answer is it's another Oklahoma State, or Oregon State, where it depends upon it's bigger brother in Athletics to provide all it's value.

And I also think you do not fully appreciate how bad the view is of the academics of the schools in Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana is in the rest of the country. The phrase "it's a southern school" is a polite way of saying that degree doesn't carry anywhere near as much weight as other schools do in places like Austin or Palo Alto or NYC
(This post was last modified: 07-25-2017 10:05 PM by Stugray2.)
07-24-2017 08:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,888
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #56
RE: For Those Who Have Said K-State & Ok-State & WVU aren't really worthwhile ...
(07-24-2017 08:19 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Auburn would be in trouble if it were not in the SEC.

They are a R2 school, not the research school. Athletics and being a meber of the SEC is what they have going for them. They are not a Purdue or Georgia Tech, where top Scientists, Studends and researchesrs flock.

JRsec, I think you focus too much on the sports side, and don;t step back and ask, in a vacuum, without the Iron Bowl, what is Auburn's stand alone value? The answer is it's another Oklahoma State, or Oregon State, where it depends upon it's bigger brother in Athletics to provide all it's value.

And I also think you do not fully appreciate how bad the view is of the academics of the schools in Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana is in the rest of the country. The phrase "it's a southern school" is a polite way of saying that degree doesn't carry anywhere near as much weight as other schools do in places like Austin or Palo Alto or NYC

You will live to see the day that Southern schools laugh at you. The shift is already underway. It's the real reason Delany wanted to expand South. You are losing representation and eventually you'll lose funding along with it. Auburn and Alabama took a drop in standing when the admission policies changed to attract out of state students. Auburn was ranked higher than Alabama for quite some time. I'm not sure where they are ranked now and don't really care. I know professors here on the cutting edge of water purification and which hold patents for the new processes. And we have others doing groundbreaking research on cancer, but that doesn't count because it's in the Vet School.

And to my generation your school didn't make your living for you. Your degree got you interviews and your performance made your career. I'm still mystified that outside of Doctoral programs, and Medical degrees why so much emphasis is placed upon it by the such a volume of posters. Unless you are in an extremely specific field of research or medicine, or you teach at the professorial level then chances are you are among the 95% of graduates whose degree isn't that consequential. This crap is far more important to millennials who waive it as a participation medal than it was to us and yet your earning potential is declining.

I'm not so sure how many undergraduates from an Ohio State program get any more recognition than students from SEC schools when applying for entry level jobs. Post graduate research students yes, but not the ones that run their yaps about the importance of their damn degree in humanities, or business, or teaching, or some other dime a dozen undergraduate diploma program.

As to law schools it's a matter of rank and specialization and then where you get your degree will matter to some firms.

But, for many of our graduates there's Emory, or Duke, or the University of Florida, or Tulane, or Rice, or Vanderbilt, or any other of the fine institutions in the South some of which Ohio State must look up to, where we will go to do our post graduate work.

But then we come to post in our retirement, or spare time, only to listen to the same crap spewed from the faceless posters who have yet to make their careers, let alone their fortunes, tell us all how poor we are down here and how worthless our schools are.

"All glory is fleeting," and the general byproduct of our higher education systems have been witnessed by me first hand. And the product coming out of our schools nationwide has nosedived at the undergraduate level steadily over the past 30 plus years. The SAT and ACT have been dumbed down several times and adjusted for cultural bias which negated sections of the logic and reasoning that were once a part of the test. And in our college classrooms the redacted history can only be overcome by trips to the library archives to see what has been edited out. It's disgusting.

But go ahead for now a feel superior, and maybe that and 5 bucks will get you a latte at Starbucks by the time your 40. But since the latte's are almost 5 bucks now maybe it will take 10.

In the meantime I'll relax, enjoy retirement, and think about your diminishing opportunities in a world filled with corporate speak and corporate abuses of their work force. A world in which nothing positive is collected in a work file of an employee, and where many companies now refuse to give recommendations when you leave their employ, but especially a world where, as you near an age where medical expenses might go up, they find a reason to let you go for another under-educated undergraduate who will work for peanuts. And regardless of whether that company is truly profitable or not they will be fine as long as they make their points in the quarterly reports. It's all so very sad.

So all of that to say this: Your life supports your diploma. It's truly not the other way around.
(This post was last modified: 07-24-2017 09:25 PM by JRsec.)
07-24-2017 08:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,790
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #57
RE: For Those Who Have Said K-State & Ok-State & WVU aren't really worthwhile additions
I'm inclined to agree with JR that Auburn is not a second fiddle the way some second most popular schools are in some states. They have a strong following and can fill a pretty big stadium and I don't think that support waxes and wanes with the program's ups and downs they way some schools do.

I also think that with the population shift to the Sunbelt (the region not the G5 league) we are going to see the academic profiles of a lot improve and become more research oriented.
07-24-2017 09:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DawgNBama Offline
the Rush Limbaugh of CSNBBS
*

Posts: 8,319
Joined: Sep 2002
Reputation: 446
I Root For: conservativism/MAGA
Location: US
Post: #58
RE: For Those Who Have Said K-State & Ok-State & WVU aren't really worthwhile additions
To me, Auburn is in a very unique situation that not too many other universities can say they're in. 'Bama is generally the big name in the state, but to say that Auburn doesn't matter in the state of Alabama is very foolish. I have lived near the B'ham metro and in Dothan, and I can tell you that Auburn has a strong following in both places, and definitely everywhere in between, in addition to 'Bama having a similar following. But that's not all!!! Georgia Tech's academics are so strict, that many in the state of Georgia can't even attend Georgia Tech!!!! So who's the more realistic choice in Georgia, if you don't want to or can't attend UGa? Try Auburn. Auburn might as well be another land grant school for the state of Georgia, IMO, considering that a lot of Georgians go there.
07-25-2017 02:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hokie Mark Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,727
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 1392
I Root For: VT, ACC teams
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #59
RE: For Those Who Have Said K-State & Ok-State & WVU aren't really worthwhile additions
If the SEC ever doubts the value of having a 2nd school in the state of Alabama, I'm sure the ACC would welcome Auburn with open arms! The ACC specializes in "little brother" schools who are strong enough to beat up big brother on a regular basis, so...

Pitt 42, Penn St 39
GT 28, UGA 27
FSU 31, Florida 13
Clemson* 56, S Carolina 7

(I've put the UL/UK game out of my head)

* I'll let Clemson fans argue who's the big brother in South Carolina...
(This post was last modified: 07-25-2017 06:49 AM by Hokie Mark.)
07-25-2017 06:48 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #60
RE: For Those Who Have Said K-State & Ok-State & WVU aren't really worthwhile additions
Out of however many FBS schools there are now (130?), for the 2016 regular season:

- 7 averaged 100k or better attendance
- 10 averaged 90k or better attendance
- 15 averaged 80k or better attendance (with #16 Wisconsin at 79,xxx)
- 19 averaged 70k or better attendance (with #20 Iowa and #21 Arkansas at 69,xxx)
- 26 averaged 60k or better attendance

Auburn was #12, with nearly 87k average attendance.

At that level, it simply does not matter what your research profile is like or if you're the lone P5 in your state or not, or how big your state is. You're in the P5, no questions asked.

Not even really an argument to be had ...
07-25-2017 09:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.