Simple question: What is your main definition of how schools are "like-minded" or not?

- Is it whether or not they are public vs private?
- Geography and/or academic rankings?
- Sports emphasis?
- Flag ship or land-grant vs otherwise?

What aspects carry the most weight for you?

(05-19-2016 08:04 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  Simple question: What is your main definition of how schools are "like-minded" or not?

- Is it whether or not they are public vs private?
- Geography and/or academic rankings?
- Sports emphasis?
- Flag ship or land-grant vs otherwise?

What aspects carry the most weight for you?

I would say the most important is sports emphasis with geography a second. Stable conference mates create a solid group to build together unified and present this best package for contract negotiations. The classic example of a confernce not on the same page was the old Big East and it's lack of unity brought a once valuable property down. The B12 is next IMHO.

(05-19-2016 08:45 PM)Pitt Co Pirates Wrote:  

(05-19-2016 08:04 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  Simple question: What is your main definition of how schools are "like-minded" or not?

- Is it whether or not they are public vs private?
- Geography and/or academic rankings?
- Sports emphasis?
- Flag ship or land-grant vs otherwise?

What aspects carry the most weight for you?

I would say the most important is sports emphasis with geography a second. Stable conference mates create a solid group to build together unified and present this best package for contract negotiations. The classic example of a confernce not on the same page was the old Big East and it's lack of unity brought a once valuable property down. The B12 is next IMHO.

I would agree with the Big EAst comparison. The Big East was brought down by the uncompromising football v. basketball only teams interests. The basketball only teams would not allow the inclusion of a team like UCF, because the money would be split more ways. The football teams were not interested in promoting FCS Villanova to FBS league status. In the Big 12, the issue is between the haves and have nots. Half the league can ride out their current contract and not worry about the destruction of the league, because they have a safe landing spot. The other half does not want to split money with any new members, and this decision will destroy the league.

Like minded universities are universities with similar goals. Major research schools are like minded. Georgia Tech, UNC, and UVA are examples of like minded universities in the ACC for the B1G.

Like minded for the B1G are large universities that are state universities, academic and research powerhouses, and a large student population.

PSU, Nebraska and Maryland all have things in common with the rest of the B1G. They are all like minded. An Ole Miss is the furthest thing from like minded for the B1G.

In your opinion Pitt Co Pirates - do Wichita State and VCU align well with Creighton, Seton Hall and Xavier? All five schools are dedicated to basketball and none of them have football. Once upon a time VCU-Xavier and Wichita State-Creighton were conference opponents. But the first two schools are public and the others are private. Some folks maintain that difference is what will keep WSU and VCU out of the Big East. I am on your side that sports emphasis and geography can overcome such a divide.

(05-19-2016 09:44 PM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  Like minded universities are universities with similar goals. Major research schools are like minded. Georgia Tech, UNC, and UVA are examples of like minded universities in the ACC for the B1G.

Like minded for the B1G are large universities that are state universities, academic and research powerhouses, and a large student population.

PSU, Nebraska and Maryland all have things in common with the rest of the B1G. They are all like minded. An Ole Miss is the furthest thing from like minded for the B1G.

I buy that. Of course there are going to be exceptions, but you summed it up well.

UC Santa Barbara is nationally respected in academia and research. By that standard our peers are more along the likes of Wisconsin, Michigan and Texas. But we don't have football.

I think we align nicely with someone like Georgetown. Both are respected academically. Both value men's soccer. But one's a public university located on the beach out west, the other is a private university in Washington DC.

There's more than one way to be like-minded.

When it comes to athletic conferences it's all about athletics. The academic rhetoric comes much later because other than the Ivy League I dare you to show a conference that was formed because of academics.

No conference was ever formed due to academics, but "fit" is something that exists.

ND turned down the Big Ten in 1999, citing among other things, how ND was small, private and Catholic and the Big Ten was made up (except for Northwestern) of large, public, land grant schools.

The Rev. Edward A. Malloy, Notre Dame's president, said the university's institutional identity was the deciding factor in the decision to remain independent.

He said: ''Just as the Universities of Michigan or Wisconsin or Illinois have core identities as the flagship institutions of their states, so Notre Dame has a core identity, and at that core are these characteristics: Catholic, private, independent. As a Catholic university with a national constituency, we believe independence continues to be our best way forward.''

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/02/06/sports...g-ten.html


When moving to the ACC, ND talked about "fit", liking the idea of private schools like Duke, Georgia Tech, Boston College, Miami and Wake Forest and academic schools like Virginia.


"The school's president, the Rev. John I. Jenkins, and athletic director Jack Swarbrick joined ACC commissioner John Swofford and three ACC presidents for a news conference on Wednesday announcing the Irish's move from the Big East.

"I don't think there's out there a better situation than the situation we have," Jenkins said. "The ACC has allowed us to retain a tradition (of football independence) that's so central to our identity in football while we're joining a conference that athletically as well as academically fits Notre Dame perfectly."

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/...hockey-acc


"Away from the fields of play, Notre Dame's entrance into the ACC means it will join a league that boasts more highly-ranked institutions in the U.S. News & World Report ratings than any other major athletic conference. Current league members Duke, Virginia, Wake Forest, North Carolina, Boston College, Georgia Tech and Miami stood among the top 50 in the 2013 edition of that widely-respected listing."

http://www.und.com/genrel/070113aac.html

Former ND athletic director and former ACC commissioner Gene Corrigan also said much the same:

"Notre Dame as an institution fits so much better with Virginia and Duke and the A.C.C. schools,” said Gene Corrigan, a former Notre Dame athletic director and a former A.C.C. commissioner. “It will be different than what we’re used to. But everything now is different than what we’re used to.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/13/sports...tball.html


So, no....a school doesn't join an athletic conference simply or primarily due to academics, but that factor and the idea of "fit" do come into play when such decisions are made.

Patriot League?

(05-20-2016 07:22 AM)TerryD Wrote:  No conference was ever formed due to academics, but "fit" is something that exists.

ND turned down the Big Ten in 1999, citing among other things, how ND was small, private and Catholic and the Big Ten was made up (except for Northwestern) of large, public, land grant schools.

The Rev. Edward A. Malloy, Notre Dame's president, said the university's institutional identity was the deciding factor in the decision to remain independent.

He said: ''Just as the Universities of Michigan or Wisconsin or Illinois have core identities as the flagship institutions of their states, so Notre Dame has a core identity, and at that core are these characteristics: Catholic, private, independent. As a Catholic university with a national constituency, we believe independence continues to be our best way forward.''

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/02/06/sports...g-ten.html


When moving to the ACC, ND talked about "fit", liking the idea of private schools like Duke, Georgia Tech and Wake Forest and academic schools like Virginia.


"The school's president, the Rev. John I. Jenkins, and athletic director Jack Swarbrick joined ACC commissioner John Swofford and three ACC presidents for a news conference on Wednesday announcing the Irish's move from the Big East.

"I don't think there's out there a better situation than the situation we have," Jenkins said. "The ACC has allowed us to retain a tradition (of football independence) that's so central to our identity in football while we're joining a conference that athletically as well as academically fits Notre Dame perfectly."

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/...hockey-acc


"Away from the fields of play, Notre Dame's entrance into the ACC means it will join a league that boasts more highly-ranked institutions in the U.S. News & World Report ratings than any other major athletic conference. Current league members Duke, Virginia, Wake Forest, North Carolina, Boston College, Georgia Tech and Miami stood among the top 50 in the 2013 edition of that widely-respected listing."

http://www.und.com/genrel/070113aac.html

Former ND athletic director and former ACC commissioner Gene Corrigan also said much the same:

"Notre Dame as an institution fits so much better with Virginia and Duke and the A.C.C. schools,” said Gene Corrigan, a former Notre Dame athletic director and a former A.C.C. commissioner. “It will be different than what we’re used to. But everything now is different than what we’re used to.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/13/sports...tball.html


So, no....a school doesn't join an athletic conference simply or primarily due to academics, but that factor and the idea of "fit" do come into play when such decisions are made.

I've always wondered about Notre Dame and the B1G.

NCAA conference affiliation linked to academic prestige in Stanford/Iowa study:


“While there is little question that the revenue-generating capacity of big-time college football is the main driver of the NCAA board’s decision, schools in those five conferences [the Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12, Atlantic Coast and Southeastern Conferences] may also be gaming their academic reputations,” said Stevens. “Now that a new category of football conferences could be created, we may well see it further improve perceptions of the academic caliber of the member schools.”

In the United States more than anywhere else in the world, academics and athletics have long been linked. Yet while American educators and social scientists have written volumes on how universities manage their academic reputations, there has been relatively little on how athletics contributes to prestige. Stevens and his colleagues, Stanford researcher Arik Lifschitz and University of Iowa sociologist Michael Sauder, set out to explore the question.

For the study, the three scholars created and analyzed a comprehensive dataset linking information about school characteristics, conference affiliation, football performance and academic reputation (as measured by US News and World Report). Looking to understand how a successful football program affects status, they explored data on 283 American universities from 1896 to 2013 — all of them present or former members of the conferences included in the NCAA’s two top subdivisions.

The researchers found that all of the widely publicized recent entries to the Big Ten, Pac-12 and Southeastern conferences, for example, are schools closely comparable in terms of US News reputation scores to the standing members. “And, of course, the most academically prestigious league in the country, the Ivy League, has offered membership to no additional school since its formation in 1956,” said Stevens. “That exclusivity is not based on sports alone.”

Moreover, Stevens and his colleagues discovered that the academic reputation scores of schools entering a given league move closer to their league average at a rate of 3 percent per year. “This may seem like a modest increment, but in the cutthroat competition for higher places in the academic pecking order, there are no small gains or losses,” said Stevens, a member of the faculty of Stanford Graduate School of Education."


https://ed.stanford.edu/news/ncaa-confer...iowa-study

(05-19-2016 08:04 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  Simple question: What is your main definition of how schools are "like-minded" or not?

- Is it whether or not they are public vs private?
- Geography and/or academic rankings?
- Sports emphasis?
- Flag ship or land-grant vs otherwise?

What aspects carry the most weight for you?

They are all factors at some level, with the importance granted to each factor differing from conference to conference. Also, the stronger conferences can put a lot greater weight on fit, which makes sense because they can be inherently choosier. The Big Ten can have a higher academic reputation requirement because they have the strength to do so, whereas the WAC essentially needs to take any warm body that they can find regardless of any factor. To your question on the Big East's apparent lack of interest in VCU and Wichita State, the new Big East has the most power from a realignment perspective within its sphere of non-FBS Division I conferences, which means that it can be as choosy in that realm in the same way as the Big Ten at the FBS level. The current Big East schools actually understand the importance of fit better than anyone (having gone through the defections by and ultimate divorce from the football schools), so merely having a good basketball program is not relevant to them if that school isn't also an institutional, academic and geographic fit for the league (which also almost certainly means that any new Big East member needs to be a private school and preferably Catholic).

(05-19-2016 09:16 PM)rosewater Wrote:  

(05-19-2016 08:45 PM)Pitt Co Pirates Wrote:  

(05-19-2016 08:04 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  Simple question: What is your main definition of how schools are "like-minded" or not?

- Is it whether or not they are public vs private?
- Geography and/or academic rankings?
- Sports emphasis?
- Flag ship or land-grant vs otherwise?

What aspects carry the most weight for you?

I would say the most important is sports emphasis with geography a second. Stable conference mates create a solid group to build together unified and present this best package for contract negotiations. The classic example of a confernce not on the same page was the old Big East and it's lack of unity brought a once valuable property down. The B12 is next IMHO.

I would agree with the Big EAst comparison. The Big East was brought down by the uncompromising football v. basketball only teams interests. The basketball only teams would not allow the inclusion of a team like UCF, because the money would be split more ways. The football teams were not interested in promoting FCS Villanova to FBS league status. In the Big 12, the issue is between the haves and have nots. Half the league can ride out their current contract and not worry about the destruction of the league, because they have a safe landing spot. The other half does not want to split money with any new members, and this decision will destroy the league.

SIGH. This is completely wrong. Frankly, the only thing that even provided a speed bump against Syracuse, Pitt and other football members from leaving the Big East immediately was the presence of the Big East Catholic schools in major eastern markets. Big East football was doomed to die from the day it was formed: Penn State was off the table in the Big Ten and Miami was ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS going to accept an invite from the ACC if it ever came. Once the ACC poached Miami, THAT was the death sentence of Big East football. The fact that the Big East lasted as long as it did was actually *because* of those Big East basketball ties. The Big East could have added UCF, Houston, Memphis and a whole list of other schools back in 2006... and EVERY Big East football school would have still bolted for any other power conference in the exact same manner that they did. The blaming of the Big East basketball schools is tiresome - the lack of value of Big East football itself compared to the other power conferences is what killed it. That had nothing to do with the basketball schools (who, as shown by the fact that they are paid more TV money for just basketball than any G5 conference) were very valuable within their sphere.

Terry, an obvious exception to your rule would be the UAA conference, in Division III.

(05-20-2016 07:24 AM)Huskies12 Wrote:  Patriot League?

Yes...it was formed for academic reasons first and the idea of no scholarships given for athletics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_League

(05-20-2016 09:19 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(05-19-2016 09:16 PM)rosewater Wrote:  

(05-19-2016 08:45 PM)Pitt Co Pirates Wrote:  

(05-19-2016 08:04 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  Simple question: What is your main definition of how schools are "like-minded" or not?

- Is it whether or not they are public vs private?
- Geography and/or academic rankings?
- Sports emphasis?
- Flag ship or land-grant vs otherwise?

What aspects carry the most weight for you?

I would say the most important is sports emphasis with geography a second. Stable conference mates create a solid group to build together unified and present this best package for contract negotiations. The classic example of a confernce not on the same page was the old Big East and it's lack of unity brought a once valuable property down. The B12 is next IMHO.

I would agree with the Big EAst comparison. The Big East was brought down by the uncompromising football v. basketball only teams interests. The basketball only teams would not allow the inclusion of a team like UCF, because the money would be split more ways. The football teams were not interested in promoting FCS Villanova to FBS league status. In the Big 12, the issue is between the haves and have nots. Half the league can ride out their current contract and not worry about the destruction of the league, because they have a safe landing spot. The other half does not want to split money with any new members, and this decision will destroy the league.

SIGH. This is completely wrong. Frankly, the only thing that even provided a speed bump against Syracuse, Pitt and other football members from leaving the Big East immediately was the presence of the Big East Catholic schools in major eastern markets. Big East football was doomed to die from the day it was formed: Penn State was off the table in the Big Ten and Miami was ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS going to accept an invite from the ACC if it ever came. Once the ACC poached Miami, THAT was the death sentence of Big East football. The fact that the Big East lasted as long as it did was actually *because* of those Big East basketball ties. The Big East could have added UCF, Houston, Memphis and a whole list of other schools back in 2006... and EVERY Big East football school would have still bolted for any other power conference in the exact same manner that they did. The blaming of the Big East basketball schools is tiresome - the lack of value of Big East football itself compared to the other power conferences is what killed it. That had nothing to do with the basketball schools (who, as shown by the fact that they are paid more TV money for just basketball than any G5 conference) were very valuable within their sphere.

+1

I, personally, love the new incarnation of the Big East not just for the basketball but also because of Marquette's affiliation with nine other similar institutions. With the exception of Butler, all are Catholic schools in big cities and have alumni from each university in each city. There is a tremendous sense of pride for students and alumni for the Big East schools now - because all are like-minded and similar institutions (not unlike the B1G with land grant schools, ACC with many large private and high-academic institutions, etc.). It says a lot when you have an entire conference on the same page for more than just sports.

The sense of school-fit in realignment, in my opinion, always gets taken for granted. While some schools may fit athletically, Presidents care so much more about academic fit, research, and resources into both. That's where, again in my opinion, so many schools fall short of potential call-up invitations - they don't check that box with the current collection of schools.

(05-20-2016 10:23 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(05-20-2016 09:19 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(05-19-2016 09:16 PM)rosewater Wrote:  

(05-19-2016 08:45 PM)Pitt Co Pirates Wrote:  

(05-19-2016 08:04 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  Simple question: What is your main definition of how schools are "like-minded" or not?

- Is it whether or not they are public vs private?
- Geography and/or academic rankings?
- Sports emphasis?
- Flag ship or land-grant vs otherwise?

What aspects carry the most weight for you?

I would say the most important is sports emphasis with geography a second. Stable conference mates create a solid group to build together unified and present this best package for contract negotiations. The classic example of a confernce not on the same page was the old Big East and it's lack of unity brought a once valuable property down. The B12 is next IMHO.

I would agree with the Big EAst comparison. The Big East was brought down by the uncompromising football v. basketball only teams interests. The basketball only teams would not allow the inclusion of a team like UCF, because the money would be split more ways. The football teams were not interested in promoting FCS Villanova to FBS league status. In the Big 12, the issue is between the haves and have nots. Half the league can ride out their current contract and not worry about the destruction of the league, because they have a safe landing spot. The other half does not want to split money with any new members, and this decision will destroy the league.

SIGH. This is completely wrong. Frankly, the only thing that even provided a speed bump against Syracuse, Pitt and other football members from leaving the Big East immediately was the presence of the Big East Catholic schools in major eastern markets. Big East football was doomed to die from the day it was formed: Penn State was off the table in the Big Ten and Miami was ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS going to accept an invite from the ACC if it ever came. Once the ACC poached Miami, THAT was the death sentence of Big East football. The fact that the Big East lasted as long as it did was actually *because* of those Big East basketball ties. The Big East could have added UCF, Houston, Memphis and a whole list of other schools back in 2006... and EVERY Big East football school would have still bolted for any other power conference in the exact same manner that they did. The blaming of the Big East basketball schools is tiresome - the lack of value of Big East football itself compared to the other power conferences is what killed it. That had nothing to do with the basketball schools (who, as shown by the fact that they are paid more TV money for just basketball than any G5 conference) were very valuable within their sphere.

+1

I, personally, love the new incarnation of the Big East not just for the basketball but also because of Marquette's affiliation with nine other similar institutions. With the exception of Butler, all are Catholic schools in big cities and have alumni from each university in each city. There is a tremendous sense of pride for students and alumni for the Big East schools now - because all are like-minded and similar institutions (not unlike the B1G with land grant schools, ACC with many large private and high-academic institutions, etc.). It says a lot when you have an entire conference on the same page for more than just sports.

The sense of school-fit in realignment, in my opinion, always gets taken for granted. While some schools may fit athletically, Presidents care so much more about academic fit, research, and resources into both. That's where, again in my opinion, so many schools fall short of potential call-up invitations - they don't check that box with the current collection of schools.

Not always -- again, Rutgers in the Big 10 is a prime example. Also WVU not getting an invitation to the ACC is another, though the ACC finally did have to relent a little bit when they invited Louisville. Presidents vote on expansion and do care.

The Big East was a marriage of convenience from the first day they expanded for football -- back in 1991.

Georgia Tech is private? Terry, I know you're desperate to get ND into the ACC as a full member, but you're pushing a little too far.

(05-19-2016 10:12 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  In your opinion Pitt Co Pirates - do Wichita State and VCU align well with Creighton, Seton Hall and Xavier? All five schools are dedicated to basketball and none of them have football. Once upon a time VCU-Xavier and Wichita State-Creighton were conference opponents. But the first two schools are public and the others are private. Some folks maintain that difference is what will keep WSU and VCU out of the Big East. I am on your side that sports emphasis and geography can overcome such a divide.

The only thing they have in common is basketball as a top priority. Outside of that, nothing. Which is why neither will ever be a member of the Big East.

Also a reason I expect to hear an announcement on football in the not too distant future.

Most schools have peer institutions. East Carolina's are:
NIU
Ohio
Southern Illinois
Texas Tech
Buffalo
Louisville
Nevada
North Dakota
South Carolina
Southern Miss
VCU

Not sure what makes a school a peer but interesting to see who is on the list.