Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Populism versus Elitism
Author Message
BruceMcF Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,263
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 792
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #21
RE: Populism versus Elitism
(08-12-2015 04:09 PM)bullet Wrote:  A lot of it is simply pointing out what the decision makers value. They are elitists.
And, being academic politicians, careerist, self-centered opportunists. So while they are snobs, they are not only snobs.
08-12-2015 10:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kittonhead Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,000
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 122
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #22
RE: Populism versus Elitism
(08-12-2015 09:48 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(08-12-2015 09:37 PM)Dasville Wrote:  I think UofL in the P5 and in particular the ACC offends certain people. I think it offends certain people because of what we may do. What we are aiming for and have on our horizon academically can be propelled by our athletics. It is right that multiple posters have brought this up.

Also, what I think a lot of G5 people are missing when they say, "It's all about the money!" when pointing to Louisville is that they then can't show how the money they're making is anywhere close to what Louisivlle was able to do (and once again, this was even with the terrible old Big East TV deals). Like I said in my prior post, Louisville was bringing in SERIOUS money BEFORE it got invited to the ACC (as opposed to a G5 school hoping to start making serious money only AFTER they get s P5 invite). Louisville was a top 25 revenue generator even without getting propped up by large conference revenues, so I don't agree that many (if any) G5 schools come even close to that standard.

Louisville has always had a P5 level budget.

15 years ago MAC schools had 13 million dollar budget and Louisville had a 30 million dollar budget, the same size as Virginia Tech and WVU at the time.

Louisville had a rivalry with Kentucky in basketball going back since time immortal. They were a power school in hoops. Louisville is also the site of the Kentucky Derby and the most important city in the state while Lexington is #2. There was a lot of money from outside the region due to horse racing and it led to deep pockets in basketball for both schools.

Louisville football was much slower to get going because the NCAA controlled broadcasts in football from the 50's to the early 80's so Louisville couldn't monetize its football program. Once the NCAA shackles were removed Louisville had broadcast potential in football.

Schnellenberger turned around the football team to the point they were a player to join a conference. They were left out of the Big East and ACC so they had to settle for CUSA and that's when the realization came they needed Papa John's stadium to get into a BCS conference.

UConn right now is in a position not unlike Louisville was 15 years ago with elite basketball but mediocre football. The AAC is a horrible conference for them with their basketball rivals mostly in the Big East and they need a power conference to recruit football players to a campus nestled in the mountains of New England. Going back to the Big East and independent in football would be a good move, IMO.
08-12-2015 10:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,152
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 889
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Populism versus Elitism
I think I read something a few years ago that today's college sports are not the Joe Pa of the past. The way of the snobbiness going on today sports is still the long practice from the start of football. What is the best for all sports today than yesterday for the players, coaches, alums and fans alike? Conferences like the Big 12, PAC 12, Big 10, ACC and SEC need to invite schools no matter what their academics are for regional purposes. The education of the players should come first, but having Creighton in the Big East, Houston, SMU, Tulsa, Tulane in the AAC, Nebraska in the Big 10, Colorado in the PAC 12, and so forth that spreads schools apart like they are would cause the players to miss many days of classes in a school year. Adding Boise State to the PAC 12 instead of Colorado may cut the miss timed in class room time would have been helped. The admins say they care about the academics? How can you have a solid academics when you have your players travel all over the country which can lower the graduation rate down? I wonder how many schools are cheating like North Carolina with fake classes and grades to keep graduation rates up?
08-13-2015 07:08 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BIgCatonProwl Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,171
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 35
I Root For: Houston Cougars
Location:
Post: #24
RE: Populism versus Elitism
(08-12-2015 06:42 PM)JRsec Wrote:  There is no greater academic snob than U.N.C. and perhaps no greater hypocrisy than their bogus classes, with bogus instructors, all sanctioned by the bursars office.

What this means to me is that it is neither about the academics, although it is good PR to pretend it is, or purely about the athletics either. It is rather about television markets and money.

What has realignment shown us? If you are the Big 10 you can pretend it is about academics when what you are really going after is markets.

If you are the SEC you can pretend it is about athletics and academics as you go for the markets.

If you are the PAC you can pretend it is about future academics, or potential athletics but it is about the markets.

If you are the ACC you can pretend it is about academics, pretend it is about basketball, or football, and even pretend it is about the compromise between the two, but guess what? It's about markets.

Why? "Because it is about television dummy!" Everyone wants to claim it is about something other than money. Why? Because when they admit it is about the money they admit they are whores and then everything is just a matter of price and performance. Hardly is this the crass culture of which academics desire to profess inclusion.

So it's about money. It's about markets because of money. It's about markets because of TV money. But it's said to about athletics and academics, because lah di dah pseudo-aristocrats can't handle conceiving of themselves as whores cheaply pimping the entertainment value of their "student" "athletes".
YEP!
(This post was last modified: 08-13-2015 07:20 AM by BIgCatonProwl.)
08-13-2015 07:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Carolina_Low_Country Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,425
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 97
I Root For: Go Pirates
Location: ENC
Post: #25
RE: Populism versus Elitism
I think it depends...
Big Ten wants AAU Schools and new markets
SEC wants AAU schools, better basketball, and new markets
PAC-12: usually takes an AAU school with a travel partner. I think they are content at 12
Big 12: Wants the best program available academics doesn't matter neither does market whatever they can get if they need to expand
ACC: Best programs left in their footprint. Northern Schools want basketball market schools, and southern schools want better football program. Notre Dame and Texas then Cinci, WVU, or Navy to fill in gap of conference lay out.

The thing going forward in expansion is the ACC. The ACC is pretty stable if they can get Texas and ND to make FSU, Clem, VT, etc. happy for football. Add WVU who also brings good football and basketball and divides the gap between Penn and VA and gets another DC team I think the ACC is happy.

The SEC wants to get the last big dogs in the South not in the SEC those are Texas, Oklahoma, UNC, Duke, and UVA. FSU, GT, and Clem have no play really but do have some chance. UT and OU do not want to be in the SEC so they can go that way and if the ACC sticks together they can not go east unless they go G5 so the question is what does the SEC do if the ACC stands together WVU, ECU, BU, SMU, TCU, Ok St?

The Big Ten wants to get AAU schools in large population areas. The can either go east or west. The have a better shot at going west and grabbing KU and OU from the Big 12. Their targets to the east are the same as the SEC they want UVA, GT, UNC, Duke, and maybe a Cuse. They also might target SEC schools Vandy and Mizzou. If the ACC sticks together I see them going west and taking OU and KU and maybe getting Mizzou.

The Pac-12 I think is content and will only expand if they have to. The problem is the their isn't many teams in the west left to go after. The Pac-12 loves AAU schools with a travel partner Was-WSU, Ore-OreSt, Ari-ASU, etc. They could add BYU and Colorado State for Utah and Colorado. BYU has great sports but their politics and religion does not fit in with PAC schools. UNLV is another potential add. Then maybe NM and Texas Tech (West Texas is the West). The question is do they go all the way to East Texas (a far stretch for a conference) and go after UT, UH, and Rice. I could see a Rice and Houston travel partnership great school and large public school. TCU, SMU, and Baylor also do not fit the mold of the PAC.

The Big 12 and all its mess. The Big 12 could really save it self and become the Big 18 and make the LHN a Big 18 Network, add new markets, and start brining in the money.

BYU
Kansas
Kansas State
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas
TCU
Baylor
Texas Tech

Iowa State
Memphis
Cincinnati
West Virginia
Connecticut
Temple
East Carolina
UCF
South Florida

Have one crossover game a year and keep travel down a bunch. Championship played on campus.

However OU and UT want Different things and probably will kill off the conference. However a backfil similar to this could be the tweener 5th conference with best of the rest and have a great name Big 18. It could kill the American and make the MWC less impressive. And leaving the rest of the G4 behind.
08-13-2015 07:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,152
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 889
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #26
RE: Populism versus Elitism
(08-13-2015 07:31 AM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  I think it depends...
Big Ten wants AAU Schools and new markets
SEC wants AAU schools, better basketball, and new markets
PAC-12: usually takes an AAU school with a travel partner. I think they are content at 12
Big 12: Wants the best program available academics doesn't matter neither does market whatever they can get if they need to expand
ACC: Best programs left in their footprint. Northern Schools want basketball market schools, and southern schools want better football program. Notre Dame and Texas then Cinci, WVU, or Navy to fill in gap of conference lay out.

The thing going forward in expansion is the ACC. The ACC is pretty stable if they can get Texas and ND to make FSU, Clem, VT, etc. happy for football. Add WVU who also brings good football and basketball and divides the gap between Penn and VA and gets another DC team I think the ACC is happy.

The SEC wants to get the last big dogs in the South not in the SEC those are Texas, Oklahoma, UNC, Duke, and UVA. FSU, GT, and Clem have no play really but do have some chance. UT and OU do not want to be in the SEC so they can go that way and if the ACC sticks together they can not go east unless they go G5 so the question is what does the SEC do if the ACC stands together WVU, ECU, BU, SMU, TCU, Ok St?

The Big Ten wants to get AAU schools in large population areas. The can either go east or west. The have a better shot at going west and grabbing KU and OU from the Big 12. Their targets to the east are the same as the SEC they want UVA, GT, UNC, Duke, and maybe a Cuse. They also might target SEC schools Vandy and Mizzou. If the ACC sticks together I see them going west and taking OU and KU and maybe getting Mizzou.

The Pac-12 I think is content and will only expand if they have to. The problem is the their isn't many teams in the west left to go after. The Pac-12 loves AAU schools with a travel partner Was-WSU, Ore-OreSt, Ari-ASU, etc. They could add BYU and Colorado State for Utah and Colorado. BYU has great sports but their politics and religion does not fit in with PAC schools. UNLV is another potential add. Then maybe NM and Texas Tech (West Texas is the West). The question is do they go all the way to East Texas (a far stretch for a conference) and go after UT, UH, and Rice. I could see a Rice and Houston travel partnership great school and large public school. TCU, SMU, and Baylor also do not fit the mold of the PAC.

The Big 12 and all its mess. The Big 12 could really save it self and become the Big 18 and make the LHN a Big 18 Network, add new markets, and start brining in the money.

BYU
Kansas
Kansas State
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas
TCU
Baylor
Texas Tech

Iowa State
Memphis
Cincinnati
West Virginia
Connecticut
Temple
East Carolina
UCF
South Florida

Have one crossover game a year and keep travel down a bunch. Championship played on campus.

However OU and UT want Different things and probably will kill off the conference. However a backfil similar to this could be the tweener 5th conference with best of the rest and have a great name Big 18. It could kill the American and make the MWC less impressive. And leaving the rest of the G4 behind.


No Temple and no U. Conn. Those 2 are not even on the expansion list. Boise State, Colorado State, Northern Illinois, Old Dominion, and North Dakota State are more ahead of them. Even Air Force is more desirable than U. Conn. and Temple.
08-13-2015 07:42 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Crimsonelf Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,568
Joined: Nov 2007
Reputation: 22
I Root For: Cardinals
Location:
Post: #27
RE: Populism versus Elitism
(08-12-2015 10:47 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  
(08-12-2015 09:48 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(08-12-2015 09:37 PM)Dasville Wrote:  I think UofL in the P5 and in particular the ACC offends certain people. I think it offends certain people because of what we may do. What we are aiming for and have on our horizon academically can be propelled by our athletics. It is right that multiple posters have brought this up.

Also, what I think a lot of G5 people are missing when they say, "It's all about the money!" when pointing to Louisville is that they then can't show how the money they're making is anywhere close to what Louisivlle was able to do (and once again, this was even with the terrible old Big East TV deals). Like I said in my prior post, Louisville was bringing in SERIOUS money BEFORE it got invited to the ACC (as opposed to a G5 school hoping to start making serious money only AFTER they get s P5 invite). Louisville was a top 25 revenue generator even without getting propped up by large conference revenues, so I don't agree that many (if any) G5 schools come even close to that standard.

Louisville has always had a P5 level budget.

15 years ago MAC schools had 13 million dollar budget and Louisville had a 30 million dollar budget, the same size as Virginia Tech and WVU at the time.

Louisville had a rivalry with Kentucky in basketball going back since time immortal. They were a power school in hoops. Louisville is also the site of the Kentucky Derby and the most important city in the state while Lexington is #2. There was a lot of money from outside the region due to horse racing and it led to deep pockets in basketball for both schools.

Louisville football was much slower to get going because the NCAA controlled broadcasts in football from the 50's to the early 80's so Louisville couldn't monetize its football program. Once the NCAA shackles were removed Louisville had broadcast potential in football.

Schnellenberger turned around the football team to the point they were a player to join a conference. They were left out of the Big East and ACC so they had to settle for CUSA and that's when the realization came they needed Papa John's stadium to get into a BCS conference.

UConn right now is in a position not unlike Louisville was 15 years ago with elite basketball but mediocre football. The AAC is a horrible conference for them with their basketball rivals mostly in the Big East and they need a power conference to recruit football players to a campus nestled in the mountains of New England. Going back to the Big East and independent in football would be a good move, IMO.

This is a very important convo, and I'm glad it has been engaged in to this point. Because I really don't think a lot of people see beyond the games to what the UofL is trying to do. Das & Frank touched upon it. But essentially, Louisville was stuck, they are a smallish but nice city stuck in a backwards-azz Country-f*#@ state. It is relatively small & poor, which means they never had much money to give to the school even under the best of circumstances.

UofL, in lieu of all the money the state didn't have to give them, were at least allowed to significantly tighten their entrance requirements. They worked for some years to raise their profile up to tier 1, albeit at the bottom edge of the old rankings around 165, which was about where WVU was when they both shared the BE together.

But UofL's problem is: how do they make a better future for themselves? They can't get money from a broke state, and after 2008, no one's really getting good public monies any longer anyway.

Well, they can fundraise-- do one of those 10 yr. = billion dollar drives. And at the end of ten years really splurge but it doesn't change their status because, frankly-- a bil. over a decade is chump change at that level & they are still stuck in Tom Thumb land academically....and athletically.

This is where UofL and all supporters in the state for the university & city really came thru, and hiring Tom Jurich (NO Tom Thumb it must be said) was a stroke of genius, and really a big part of a much larger long term goal. The goal is nothing less than changing the university's, and the city's, Destiny by changing their academic status THRU athletics.

You see, it's really not about the games, oh they are important, and with the hideous blew thangs crawling about the landscape Cards fans need some way to combat them. But primarily UofL's ascension to a P5, and a very good academic conference, was about ACADEMICS as the final goal.

Simple admission to this conference will not immediately instill a higher academic profile on the school, but over time it will because they are in the club, that meets in the cool marble halls, of the high, high ivory tower---and THAT is what UofL's ambition has been all along.

Yes the games are fun, but the growth of a truly good Academic & Research institution is Better. And we are seeing the beginnings of it already and it will continue. It's not easy, arguably the academic/research side of an institution is much more expensive and takes a great deal longer to pull off. But it is happening and has been since Louisville was invited to the ACC, in many ways not even readily obvious to us on the outside.

What the university, the city, Admins, the AD for sure, and even McConnell in DC pulled off has been an Immense Coup, and absolutely Brilliant...
08-13-2015 07:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,918
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 1003
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #28
RE: Populism versus Elitism
Intercollegiate athletics and the P5 are not like a list that you can make as a target, meet some metrics and be in.

It is more like a top tier country club. The existing members care what you bring to the club (with a country club it is usually business opportunity or political influence) but unless you blow the roof off with what you bring so that they can tolerate you being a clod or socially inept, the weeding of applicants comes down to whether this is someone you want to socialize with.

BYU is a perfect example. In the metrics they are a good fit for a P5 league but not such a blow the roof off addition that leagues have moved past the "is this someone I want to be in the room with" question.
08-13-2015 09:05 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,161
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 449
I Root For: Common Sense
Location: Nunnayadamnbusiness
Post: #29
RE: Populism versus Elitism
(08-13-2015 07:42 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(08-13-2015 07:31 AM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  I think it depends...
Big Ten wants AAU Schools and new markets
SEC wants AAU schools, better basketball, and new markets
PAC-12: usually takes an AAU school with a travel partner. I think they are content at 12
Big 12: Wants the best program available academics doesn't matter neither does market whatever they can get if they need to expand
ACC: Best programs left in their footprint. Northern Schools want basketball market schools, and southern schools want better football program. Notre Dame and Texas then Cinci, WVU, or Navy to fill in gap of conference lay out.

The thing going forward in expansion is the ACC. The ACC is pretty stable if they can get Texas and ND to make FSU, Clem, VT, etc. happy for football. Add WVU who also brings good football and basketball and divides the gap between Penn and VA and gets another DC team I think the ACC is happy.

The SEC wants to get the last big dogs in the South not in the SEC those are Texas, Oklahoma, UNC, Duke, and UVA. FSU, GT, and Clem have no play really but do have some chance. UT and OU do not want to be in the SEC so they can go that way and if the ACC sticks together they can not go east unless they go G5 so the question is what does the SEC do if the ACC stands together WVU, ECU, BU, SMU, TCU, Ok St?

The Big Ten wants to get AAU schools in large population areas. The can either go east or west. The have a better shot at going west and grabbing KU and OU from the Big 12. Their targets to the east are the same as the SEC they want UVA, GT, UNC, Duke, and maybe a Cuse. They also might target SEC schools Vandy and Mizzou. If the ACC sticks together I see them going west and taking OU and KU and maybe getting Mizzou.

The Pac-12 I think is content and will only expand if they have to. The problem is the their isn't many teams in the west left to go after. The Pac-12 loves AAU schools with a travel partner Was-WSU, Ore-OreSt, Ari-ASU, etc. They could add BYU and Colorado State for Utah and Colorado. BYU has great sports but their politics and religion does not fit in with PAC schools. UNLV is another potential add. Then maybe NM and Texas Tech (West Texas is the West). The question is do they go all the way to East Texas (a far stretch for a conference) and go after UT, UH, and Rice. I could see a Rice and Houston travel partnership great school and large public school. TCU, SMU, and Baylor also do not fit the mold of the PAC.

The Big 12 and all its mess. The Big 12 could really save it self and become the Big 18 and make the LHN a Big 18 Network, add new markets, and start brining in the money.

BYU
Kansas
Kansas State
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas
TCU
Baylor
Texas Tech

Iowa State
Memphis
Cincinnati
West Virginia
Connecticut
Temple
East Carolina
UCF
South Florida

Have one crossover game a year and keep travel down a bunch. Championship played on campus.

However OU and UT want Different things and probably will kill off the conference. However a backfil similar to this could be the tweener 5th conference with best of the rest and have a great name Big 18. It could kill the American and make the MWC less impressive. And leaving the rest of the G4 behind.


No Temple and no U. Conn. Those 2 are not even on the expansion list. Boise State, Colorado State, Northern Illinois, Old Dominion, and North Dakota State are more ahead of them. Even Air Force is more desirable than U. Conn. and Temple.

Old Dominion and Northern Illinois are ahead of Connecticut? That is insane.
08-13-2015 09:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,161
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 449
I Root For: Common Sense
Location: Nunnayadamnbusiness
Post: #30
RE: Populism versus Elitism
Carolina_Low _Country wrote:

"I think it depends...
Big Ten wants AAU Schools and new markets
SEC wants AAU schools, better basketball, and new markets
PAC-12: usually takes an AAU school with a travel partner. I think they are content at 12
Big 12: Wants the best program available academics doesn't matter neither does market whatever they can get if they need to expand
ACC: Best programs left in their footprint. Northern Schools want basketball market schools, and southern schools want better football program. Notre Dame and Texas then Cinci, WVU, or Navy to fill in gap of conference lay out."

I definitely agree with you that every conference has different needs. Also, every conference has different standards and priorities.

A point I have been making for a long time is that there is no pecking order. A program that might be first in line for one league may not even be considered for another league - and it may have nothing to do with geography.

Also, timing and circumstances have a lot to do with all of these decisions. Three years ago, there is no way the ACC would have considered taking Louisville over Connecticut. However, as events evolved and circumstances changed, the Cardinals became the clear choice over the Huskies.

One statement that you made with which I would take great exception is that the "northern schools want basketball schools." I can't speak for all of the fans of my own school much less the other schools. However, I think that is an absurd statement.

I think we are all pretty much on the same page as everyone else. We would love to add a Notre Dame or a Penn State or a Texas to the ACC. If we couldn't get any of the big fish, and the GOR were not a factor, I would love to add West Virginia to the ACC. I think they would fit in very well with Louisville and his a rival for the Cardinals as well as Virginia Tech and Pitt. Honestly, if the ACC were to need to back fill a spot or two, one of the first phone calls they should make should be to Morgantown to gauge their interest in joining the league. I believe the Mountaineers would move heaven and earth to make that happen as the ACC would give them a more natural home than they have ever had before.

Of the current non-P5 schools, my first choice would probably be Central Florida because of its football ceiling. However, I don't think anyone is thinking basketball first right now. In fact, I don't think that any of the choices the ACC has made have been basketball first choices – not even Pitt and Syracuse.
(This post was last modified: 08-13-2015 09:29 AM by Dr. Isaly von Yinzer.)
08-13-2015 09:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,161
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 449
I Root For: Common Sense
Location: Nunnayadamnbusiness
Post: #31
RE: Populism versus Elitism
I think Louisville is a perfect example of a school doing things extremely well on the athletic fundraising front and getting a little lucky. I see them in very much the same light as I see TCU. They definitely earned their way into the P5 – but they also got more than a few breaks along the way.

I also think UofL were tremendous beneficiaries of not having any pro sports teams with which to compete. Their city is large enough to cultivate a large fan base but not quite large enough to interest professional sports organizations. That is such an enormous break for them I can't even tell you how much it helps them.

I also think the Yum! Center was a great gift to that university from the state of Kentucky. It is a major profit center for the University of Louisville and just transformed their entire athletic department. Papa John's Cardinal Stadium is also a tremendous asset for that university.

When I look at all of those things that have gone on their way as well as their market conditions that favor them, I can't help but see major parallels between them and the University of Connecticut.

UConn has an entire state at its disposal and it is basically an very much the same position as Louisville has been for sometime now. Also, like Kentucky, Connecticut has no professional sports in the Huskies mean a lot to the people of that state. Also like Louisville, Connecticut has a P5 budget already. If Connecticut can get a break or two, they would easily compete in any P5 conference. I think people are vastly underrating The power and potential of the University of Connecticut.
08-13-2015 09:37 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wilkie01 Offline
Cards Prognosticater
Jersey Retired

Posts: 26,753
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 1072
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Planet Red
Post: #32
RE: Populism versus Elitism
But you are wrong. UConn and UK are the flagship schools, respectively for Connecticut and Kentucky. Louisville's alumina have given back to the university greatly. The State of Kentucky does help Louisville as much as it does UK. Louisville is the poster child for well managed and has great corporate sponsors. Look what we managed with CUSA and Big East revenue. Lookout as the ACC revenue rolls in! 07-coffee3
08-13-2015 09:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,161
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 449
I Root For: Common Sense
Location: Nunnayadamnbusiness
Post: #33
RE: Populism versus Elitism
I'm not really sure where we disagree?

There is no question that Louisville has made a lot of good decisions. However, they have also benefited tremendously from circumstance.

Perhaps they don't get as much money as the University of Kentucky but that's just how it goes. I live in Pennsylvania and I can tell you that Pitt does not get nearly as much money as Penn State. That's just the deal for schools in our situation.

UofL did get the Yum! Center, and they got terms that were like a professional team would typically get. When Pitt built the Petersen Events Center, it did not get nearly as favorable terms as Louisville got. In PA, those types of sweetheart deals are typically reserved for our professional sports teams like the Steelers, Eagles, Phillies, Pirates, Penguins, etc.

The fact that Louisville was able to get a professional style agreement from its state without any realistic threat of relocation, as the professional teams often threaten, is a testament to your negotiators' ability to extort the taxpayers but it is also highly indicative of your advantageous position within that particular market. That is hardly an incidental consideration. In fact, I think it is the primary reason why Louisville brings in the type of money it does. Again, that is not a criticism of Louisville in anyway. It is just an honest observation of who they are
(This post was last modified: 08-13-2015 10:11 AM by Dr. Isaly von Yinzer.)
08-13-2015 10:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BIgCatonProwl Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,171
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 35
I Root For: Houston Cougars
Location:
Post: #34
RE: Populism versus Elitism
I read a interview with one of the Commissioner cannot remember who, a few months back about realignment, and one of the questions the interviewer posed was what was some of the criteria that was taken into consideration for a expansion candidate to be a member of the P5. I remember the interviewee saying explicitly one of the criteria was a rich tradition, the program had to have some type of cache with the public some history about it, a winning tradition, a university that had at one time or another that had captured the public mind.
08-13-2015 10:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Dasville Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,796
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 246
I Root For: UofL
Location:
Post: #35
RE: Populism versus Elitism
(08-13-2015 10:08 AM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  I'm not really sure where we disagree?

There is no question that Louisville has made a lot of good decisions. However, they have also benefited tremendously from circumstance.

Perhaps they don't get as much money as the University of Kentucky but that's just how it goes. I live in Pennsylvania and I can tell you that Pitt does not get nearly as much money as Penn State. That's just the deal for schools in our situation.

UofL did get the Yum! Center, and they got terms that were like a professional team would typically get. When Pitt built the Petersen Events Center, it did not get nearly as favorable terms as Louisville got. In PA, those types of sweetheart deals are typically reserved for our professional sports teams like the Steelers, Eagles, Phillies, Pirates, Penguins, etc.

The fact that Louisville was able to get a professional style agreement from its state without any realistic threat of relocation, as the professional teams often threaten, is a testament to your negotiators' ability to extort the taxpayers but it is also highly indicative of your advantageous position within that particular market. That is hardly an incidental consideration. In fact, I think it is the primary reason why Louisville brings in the type of money it does. Again, that is not a criticism of Louisville in anyway. It is just an honest observation of who they are

The State of Kentucky does not own the Yum! center. Regarding our terms as compared to other professional teams and their venues, Adcorbet has had some very informative posts regarding the subject.
08-13-2015 10:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CardFan1 Offline
Red Thunderbird
*

Posts: 15,155
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 647
I Root For: Louisville ACC
Location:
Post: #36
RE: Populism versus Elitism
(08-12-2015 09:48 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(08-12-2015 09:37 PM)Dasville Wrote:  I think UofL in the P5 and in particular the ACC offends certain people. I think it offends certain people because of what we may do. What we are aiming for and have on our horizon academically can be propelled by our athletics. It is right that multiple posters have brought this up.

Also, what I think a lot of G5 people are missing when they say, "It's all about the money!" when pointing to Louisville is that they then can't show how the money they're making is anywhere close to what Louisivlle was able to do (and once again, this was even with the terrible old Big East TV deals). Like I said in my prior post, Louisville was bringing in SERIOUS money BEFORE it got invited to the ACC (as opposed to a G5 school hoping to start making serious money only AFTER they get s P5 invite). Louisville was a top 25 revenue generator even without getting propped up by large conference revenues, so I don't agree that many (if any) G5 schools come even close to that standard.

A lot of People fail to recognize that Louisville has a lot of well to do Folks living here. There also is a wealth of Big corporations in town that provide good wages that relate to disposable income. GE, Ford, UPS, Humana, Farm Bureau, Amazon, YUM! Brands, Papa Johns, Nortons Health Care as well as many smaller corporations that pay well. There also are Big events held here like the Kentucky Derby, PGA, NSRA Street Rod Nationals that bring in large sums of cash into Louisville. Many Universities don't have those community resources to draw from. Cost of living and Housing is also more affordable in terms of what Home types and sizes You can buy compared to other locales . Not having a Pro Team in town also helps fill the Stadium on Saturday.04-cheers
08-13-2015 10:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wilkie01 Offline
Cards Prognosticater
Jersey Retired

Posts: 26,753
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 1072
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Planet Red
Post: #37
RE: Populism versus Elitism
(08-13-2015 10:27 AM)Dasville Wrote:  
(08-13-2015 10:08 AM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  I'm not really sure where we disagree?

There is no question that Louisville has made a lot of good decisions. However, they have also benefited tremendously from circumstance.

Perhaps they don't get as much money as the University of Kentucky but that's just how it goes. I live in Pennsylvania and I can tell you that Pitt does not get nearly as much money as Penn State. That's just the deal for schools in our situation.

UofL did get the Yum! Center, and they got terms that were like a professional team would typically get. When Pitt built the Petersen Events Center, it did not get nearly as favorable terms as Louisville got. In PA, those types of sweetheart deals are typically reserved for our professional sports teams like the Steelers, Eagles, Phillies, Pirates, Penguins, etc.

The fact that Louisville was able to get a professional style agreement from its state without any realistic threat of relocation, as the professional teams often threaten, is a testament to your negotiators' ability to extort the taxpayers but it is also highly indicative of your advantageous position within that particular market. That is hardly an incidental consideration. In fact, I think it is the primary reason why Louisville brings in the type of money it does. Again, that is not a criticism of Louisville in anyway. It is just an honest observation of who they are

The State of Kentucky does not own the Yum! center. Regarding our terms as compared to other professional teams and their venues, Adcorbet has had some very informative posts regarding the subject.

Louisville has built most of its Athletic Venues from Alumina donations, Corporate Sponsors donations, and Men's basketball surplus revenue. So the difference is UofL is well managed and well guided by Dr. Ramsey and AD Jurich. We have never had a blank check like UConn and UK have. 07-coffee3
08-13-2015 10:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BewareThePhog Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,881
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 137
I Root For: KU
Location:
Post: #38
RE: Populism versus Elitism
Back to the original question, I think that there are several distinctions to be made. First of all, there's a difference between what someone thinks will happen versus what they think should happen. If an opinion is offered on the former, that doesn't necessarily reflect the poster's preferences so much as their opinion.

If you consider the athletic v academic balance, I suspect that the answer is often more complicated than just one or the other. Geography, markets, cultural fit, and other factors probably often factor into someone's opinion as to what the best fits may be. Just as someone may essentially overlook ethical considerations in politics when it applies to a candidate from his party while applying strict standards to the other party's candidates, someone who may favor a school for other reasons may be more prone to highlight a shortcoming in another candidate in terms of either athletics or academics, even if that was just one factor to consider. It probably also depends on the conference in question - the B1G may not insist on 100% academic excellence, but they can certainly afford to be pickier than the Big 12, for instance. I do think there's also truth to the notion that schools would prefer to associate with schools of similar or higher academic pedigrees - yes, an athletic conference is separate from an academic consortium, but at the same time just as business gets done at the country club, social interaction plays a role in making academic associations, and football games are a great place for people to come together.

Also, I suspect that while the athletic/academic split is the explicitly stated differential of "populist" v "elitist", I wonder if another aspect that may have gone unstated is the question of whether schools that are part of P5 conferences but which haven't distinguished themselves on the field (at least lately) are "deserving" of their spots, as opposed to schools such as Boise State that have had notable on-field success recently. Should a school like Indiana or Kansas "get a pass" on years of mediocre football while Boise State sits on the sidelines? That's a tough question, but aside from the fact that such schools contribute in other ways (and yes, I chose a couple of obvious big basketball brands), there's also the fact that part of the reason they have mediocre records is that they've been competing against the top echelon schools like Ohio State or Oklahoma. As long as they make a reasonable effort to build their programs (and ideally, have sporadic success such as KU's 3 bowl wins under Mangino, including an Orange Bowl), there's no reason they should be booted for "more deserving" programs. It's not necessarily "elitist" to recognize that long-time conference members have often contributed in other ways, not just recently but over time.
08-13-2015 05:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bearcats#1 Online
Ad nauseam King
*

Posts: 45,310
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 1224
I Root For: Pony94
Location: In your head.
Post: #39
RE: Populism versus Elitism
(08-12-2015 06:42 PM)JRsec Wrote:  There is no greater academic snob than U.N.C. and perhaps no greater hypocrisy than their bogus classes, with bogus instructors, all sanctioned by the bursars office.

What this means to me is that it is neither about the academics, although it is good PR to pretend it is, or purely about the athletics either. It is rather about television markets and money.

What has realignment shown us? If you are the Big 10 you can pretend it is about academics when what you are really going after is markets.

If you are the SEC you can pretend it is about athletics and academics as you go for the markets.

If you are the PAC you can pretend it is about future academics, or potential athletics but it is about the markets.

If you are the ACC you can pretend it is about academics, pretend it is about basketball, or football, and even pretend it is about the compromise between the two, but guess what? It's about markets.

Why? "Because it is about television dummy!" Everyone wants to claim it is about something other than money. Why? Because when they admit it is about the money they admit they are whores and then everything is just a matter of price and performance. Hardly is this the crass culture of which academics desire to profess inclusion.

So it's about money. It's about markets because of money. It's about markets because of TV money. But it's said to about athletics and academics, because lah di dah pseudo-aristocrats can't handle conceiving of themselves as whores cheaply pimping the entertainment value of their "student" "athletes".

totally agree
08-14-2015 09:46 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wilkie01 Offline
Cards Prognosticater
Jersey Retired

Posts: 26,753
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 1072
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Planet Red
Post: #40
RE: Populism versus Elitism
(08-14-2015 09:46 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  
(08-12-2015 06:42 PM)JRsec Wrote:  There is no greater academic snob than U.N.C. and perhaps no greater hypocrisy than their bogus classes, with bogus instructors, all sanctioned by the bursars office.

What this means to me is that it is neither about the academics, although it is good PR to pretend it is, or purely about the athletics either. It is rather about television markets and money.

What has realignment shown us? If you are the Big 10 you can pretend it is about academics when what you are really going after is markets.

If you are the SEC you can pretend it is about athletics and academics as you go for the markets.

If you are the PAC you can pretend it is about future academics, or potential athletics but it is about the markets.

If you are the ACC you can pretend it is about academics, pretend it is about basketball, or football, and even pretend it is about the compromise between the two, but guess what? It's about markets.

Why? "Because it is about television dummy!" Everyone wants to claim it is about something other than money. Why? Because when they admit it is about the money they admit they are whores and then everything is just a matter of price and performance. Hardly is this the crass culture of which academics desire to profess inclusion.

So it's about money. It's about markets because of money. It's about markets because of TV money. But it's said to about athletics and academics, because lah di dah pseudo-aristocrats can't handle conceiving of themselves as whores cheaply pimping the entertainment value of their "student" "athletes".

totally agree

We three agree! 04-cheers
08-14-2015 09:55 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.