(01-12-2016 01:10 PM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 09:00 AM)midtowncowboy Wrote:  

(01-11-2016 02:08 PM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  None of these conferences really care about academics with regards to annexation. It's just a convenient excuse.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I think you are dead wrong. The final decisions on conference alignments are made by university presidents, who are obviously concerned with academic image. There is more money to made in research grants than athletics.

Academics mean diddly in conference realignment. You don't measure a business school by the medical school, you don't measure the football team by the baseball team, and while there might be -might be - some basic standards involved, you don't build an athletic program by the schools academic standards.

(01-12-2016 09:10 AM)Smith Wrote:  Yep, they care about butts in seat and the fans here have failed and are proud of it.

How often have you put your butt in a seat?

#canada

(01-16-2016 11:48 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(01-15-2016 09:57 AM)EdmondTiger Wrote:  Tulsa partners with OU to operate the School of community medicine in Tulsa.

The governor should require UT-K to "partner" with UofM in the operation of the medical school here. It is obsurd for an institution 400 miles away to have total control and credit. It isn't 1910 anymore. If UofM could just have enough "partnership" to allow substantial claiming of research credit, the benefits to academic prestige and in turn, our community, could be enormous.

I don't understand this either. It makes no sense. Why not just turn over the operation of the medical school here to the University of Memphis and allow UTK to align itself with the medical school in Johnson City. It would make a whole lot more sense geographically.

(01-17-2016 03:29 AM)TigerJJ Wrote:  

(01-16-2016 11:48 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(01-15-2016 09:57 AM)EdmondTiger Wrote:  Tulsa partners with OU to operate the School of community medicine in Tulsa.

The governor should require UT-K to "partner" with UofM in the operation of the medical school here. It is obsurd for an institution 400 miles away to have total control and credit. It isn't 1910 anymore. If UofM could just have enough "partnership" to allow substantial claiming of research credit, the benefits to academic prestige and in turn, our community, could be enormous.

I don't understand this either. It makes no sense. Why not just turn over the operation of the medical school here to the University of Memphis and allow UTK to align itself with the medical school in Johnson City. It would make a whole lot more sense geographically.

Flagship Universities hate to give up their landmarks/stakes in other areas across the state.

Similar actions in FLA...where FSU and UF lead the charge to re-introduced the state to Florida A&M Law School by putting it in Orlando...killing any chance that the booming local Univ, UCF, could ever start one up.

Same reason why UF moved their Pharm D program to the new Medical City next to UCF's new School of Medicine...which will stop any chance for UCF staring up their own Pharmacy program.

UT obviously enjoys the exposure from across the state in Memphis...and they will never ever let that go...even though "logic" tells you in this day and age, Univ of Memphis should run that Medical School.

(01-17-2016 06:50 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  UT obviously enjoys the exposure from across the state in Memphis...and they will never ever let that go...

No, they certainly won't do so willingly, but if that had been worried about in the early 1900's, the University of Memphis wouldn't even be here. UT-K has always fought the founding and growth of UofM every step of the way. The medical school is only one piece of their statewide empire which includes the Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the Space Institute in Tullahoma. Taking the medical school away from them may be an impossible dream, but a "partnership" in which UofM has enough involvement to share credit for research might be doable with a reasonably supportive governor such as we now have with Haslam.

(01-16-2016 09:58 PM)SMUleopold Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 01:10 PM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 09:00 AM)midtowncowboy Wrote:  

(01-11-2016 02:08 PM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  None of these conferences really care about academics with regards to annexation. It's just a convenient excuse.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I think you are dead wrong. The final decisions on conference alignments are made by university presidents, who are obviously concerned with academic image. There is more money to made in research grants than athletics.

Academics mean diddly in conference realignment. You don't measure a business school by the medical school, you don't measure the football team by the baseball team, and while there might be -might be - some basic standards involved, you don't build an athletic program by the schools academic standards.

And the Big 10 doesn't prefer schools with AAU admission...