(10-10-2011 12:15 PM)UofLgrad07 Wrote:  

(10-10-2011 06:47 AM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  First the term "unpaid" is complete horsecrap. As a parent paying for one child's college education with two more to go, I can assure you that they receive quite a substantial payment in the form of a free education and free room and board.

Do football or basketball player get paid when their likeness is used in video games, advertisements, etc? Do they earn royalties from dvd sales, merchandise sales, etc after they graduate? Are they allowed to keep their scholarship if they are an excellent student but receive a debilitating injury?

How many football and basketball players leave college with a useful degree (i.e. something other than communications, sports management, etc)? How much time do you think those players actually get to study or devote to academics (I can tell you first hand that programs find easy ways to get around the 20 hour a week cap on practice time)?

(10-10-2011 06:47 AM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  Secondly, the school doesn't make money. Most Athletic Departments run in the red. Why is this? It is because the government has decided it isn't fair that nobody wants to go watch girls volleyball and track and field. So they passed Title 9, where the school has to use the money from revenue sports to pay for the tuition, room and board of the non revenue sports. This is a case where the government imposing their notion of fairness has caused additional cost to the universities. These costs have to be paid for, so there is a never ending search for new revenues.

Title IX certainly hinders profitability of athletic departments, but that brings up two points:

#1. If universities are suppose to be institutes of higher learning that are using amateur athletes, why is it necessary to be making money on athletics? Why is it necessary to have athletic budgets in the 50-100 million dollar range. The problem is that unlike a normal sports business (pays wages, worker's comp, taxes, etc), universities are behaving like businesses (chasing the highest dollar sign, signing billion dollar contracts, creating unfair advantages like the BCS to avoid sharing money or recruits, etc) without having any of the responsibilities of businesses (no taxes).

#2. I would also argue one reason why schools don't make money is because they are paying ridiculous salaries for coaches, ADs, etc. If university is an institution of higher learning, why are many of the highest paid individuals in the athletic staff? Why are some coaches making 20-25 times more than professors (the people who are actually doing the work of the university). Without any sort of cap on athletic expenditures, schools are forced to bid higher and higher salaries to keep coaches, ADs, etc. So would argue that that is the nature of capitalism. I agree, but if we are going down that route (that college athletics are operating under a purely capitalism system in the same manner as a business does), then I would argue that they should pay taxes and wages as well and drop the notion that they are doing what is best for the education of the student.

Exactly, I don't know whether to laugh or cry when I see those ridiculous NCAA ads touting that all their student athletes are going pro in something other than sports. That might apply to Water Polo players or to the ones playing for D-III schools like MIT or Tufts but no way does it apply to the football and basketball ringers in D-I.

Look at a school like Georgetown for instance. For normal people it is ridiculously hard to get into and if you get in it you still have no easy ride like you would at some junior college. However, if you are Allen Iverson or some other guy who can dunk a basketball or shoot 3 pointers they will do whatever they can to slide you in so you can play basketball and provide whatever is needed to keep you eligible to keep playing. I mean are people really going to say that Iverson was some sort of elite scholar who was at Georgetown for any purpose other than to play basketball and later jump to the NBA? I'm sorry but the guy is as illiterate and ignorant as they get. There was no way he chose Georgetown for the "academics" nor did Georgetown admit him because they thought he'd win a Pulitzer or Nobel prize someday.

Iverson is an easy example but I could go on and on listing ringers populating past and present rosters of D-I football and basketball teams. Even the APR has been a joke. Schools simply cluster their athletes into easy courses and majors or just blatantly falsify grades and test scores. There are all sorts of easily manipulated loopholes built into the APR as well. The truth is the APR is nothing more than propaganda and a smoke screen to discourage detractors and for the NCAA to maintain the illusion of a "student-athlete".

Neil, Syracuse has been flirting with the ACC ever since they were passed over in the first round of ACC expansion by VT. WVU and Pitt's flirtations are very recent things by comparison...

(01-11-2012 06:51 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(01-11-2012 05:03 PM)Butterfly Wrote:  

(01-11-2012 04:35 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(01-11-2012 04:25 PM)Butterfly Wrote:  

(01-11-2012 04:13 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  I would answer yes, because it is likely that NBC will offer a contract to the new BE very soon, even though most, if not every member in the league would jump to another more prestigious and stable bcs league if the offer came.

Prestige? How does that at all fit into the equation?
The monetary difference between being a member of each conference is going away at this point. Prestige is just a nice way of saying posturing, that will come far short of satisfying most, if the ACC keeps coming up short in athletics; I'd imagine.
Unless you mean the prestige they carry as institutions, which I'll acknowledge the ACC has a little more of. Now of course, we'd have to consider how the different coffers would open to such and such conference, but I don't know that the pretension of academic superiority, means as much as you're implying it does. If that was the case, I highly doubt we'd want WVU back.

Dude, you can ignore the importance of prestige as much as you want but that wont make it any less a factor in why schools like Pitt and SU left the BE. You asked the question about offereing a tv deal to a league when members are likely to jump at any moment. I answered the question with a real to life example of all the schools in the BE being in that position. And you dont have a whole lot of room to trash WV academics.

I was a graduate student at RIT... I have plenty of room to trash most state universities on academics. There's a difference though, between the illusion of prestige, and the actual quality of academics on campus. I think that part has eluded you in this conversation.

Congratulations on your graduating from RIT. Its a great school and is very prestigious. I will tell you what has eluded you; You think the schools in the acc and their collective academic prestige is an illusion.

I went to RIT for a year, the thing I noticed is aside from the fact RIT has the only formal program in imaging science in the United States, the Kate Gleason college of engineering is known to many in the IT field, in contrast the L.C. Smith college of engineering(Syracuse) isn't even on most people's radar. The problem with RIT, is they have mandatory coops, which means there aren't very many 4 year graduates. However, their academics are very high up. With regard to schools who only offer masters as their highest degree, USNEWS ranked them 4th in the country.
The other thing that bothers people about them(by people I mean other universities), is they are part of Intel's primary recruiting ground.


Syracuse is a fine school, for my line of work though, in toxicology and immunology, SUNY upstate isn't really best for that.
While it is a tremendous school, if you want to work in academia, or as a surgeon or specialist, not so much for what I wanted to do.
In fact, I think aOSU, was better. I needed to get out of Ohio after I went there.

You want to talk about thick headed, snobby elitists? Go to Columbus some time. People who never went there boast about it.
Again, prestige is just a nice way of saying you have a lot of stuff in your scholastic curio cabinet. What you've accomplished means nothing in light of the moment you're in. I'm not wowed.

As for conferences, Duke has a fine selection of degrees in microbiology, biochemistry and even one of the best stem cell labs in the country, but Virginia university? Meh...
The ACC is a mesh of great and mediocore schools. Just like every other conference in the country. Universities, are just corporations and corporations being people, have a tendency to take themselves too seriously.
Just saying...

And yes, I'm calling it VU on purpose.
Just like I'll call it Georgia tech. University.

Academic prestige if it is determined by U.S. News is an illusion. Colleges can be ranked in tiers but not by numbers.
The proof here is simply show me an objective formula U.S. New uses. You wont' find it. In fact they say:

"The U.S. News ranking formula gives significant weight to the opinions of those in a position to judge a school’s undergraduate academic excellence."

In other words bull****.

http://www.usnewsuniversitydirectory.com...gy-bc.aspx


I think you can have a tier 1, 2, 3 and that would be more reasonable. Too many variables to rank colleges as 1,2,3. Is Harvard better than Yale? But U.S. new ranking has become the magazines SI swimsuit issue. It's the only money maker they have so they have to keep it alive even if it is bogus.

But What I really wanted to say is to dispell the myth that SYR been plotting it's way out of the BE since the first raid. Not true. The first raid was about following Miami and Miami president Shalayla was a SYR grad. We all thought the BE was dead and Shalayla wanted to protect her alma. Miami was calling the shots in those days. SYR didn't get "passed over" for VT. Some SYR officials openly opposed the move (Boeheim) and SYR was reported "luke warm" about joining the ACC. BC and SYR were rected first and both vowed to support the BE. Then BC jumped. VT filed a lawsuit against the ACC and then VT jumped to the ACC- dropping the suit.

IN this latest raid SYR, PItt, UCONN, RUtgers and Nova had all petitioned the ACC. What we don't know is Why 5 BE schools considered jumping to the ACC. We don't know what was going on behind closed doors. We all thought we were headed to the huge TV deal and yet 5 BE schools were looking to jump ship. Something else was going on. But it was hardly a SYR plot anymore than it was a plot by the four other BE teams who petitioned the ACC.

(01-12-2012 12:46 PM)Ottoman Wrote:  Academic prestige if it is determined by U.S. News is an illusion.

I'm sorry, but there is no defacto metric for prestige.
It's a word that by it's very nature, is subject to the bias of the individual using it.
Like I said, I went there for a year, their engineering school is better than most state universities, I don't see it as a reason to rub it in people's faces.

I also think their coops, present far more value than any typical experience an undergrad would normally get.

Quote: Colleges can be ranked in tiers but not by numbers.

Prove it.
Make a case empirically, for why tiers are an objective standard upon which schools are judged reasonably, but numbers are not.
In fact, explain to me how that works at all, given that the superiority of a tier is usually followed by a rank of numerical significance?
Does that make Syracuse alpha tier? Tier A? The tier of origin?
Tier S, like the first letter in the name?
You say that, as though you saying it, makes it so.
Circular reasoning is one of the worst logical fallacies to fall victim too.

Quote:The proof here is simply show me an objective formula

A negative evidence cannot be used to validate a claim, a lack of said formula is not proof of anything. That is yet another logical fallacy on your part.
It's an opinion, there is no such formula, that's been my point the entire time.

It's just a bunch of rhetoric and posturing. Chest thumping and for the life of me, I don't know why anyone really thinks much of it at all.
Add to that they're a tiny private university... I mean the fact we have to discuss this in the first place, shows just how much of a farce this "superiority" bit really is.

Quote: U.S. New uses. You wont' find it. In fact they say:

"The U.S. News ranking formula gives significant weight to the opinions of those in a position to judge a school’s undergraduate academic excellence."

In other words bull****.

Ok, it's bull because it doesn't go with your agenda, nope nothing biased, short sighted, uninformed or oblivious about that
I'm not going to be bothered reading the rest of your tantrum, I really don't care. This will just be pages of arguing and no one here really cares either, I assure you.
Pout if you want, OSU isn't The Ohio State University, Syracuse is not the university of New York(You're not really even in New York, kid yourself otherwise if you like.) and the ACC's prestige is just a bunch of cumulitive dust bunnies.
Like an old man clinging to his record player, or people hyping up boxing...
That old standard....

(01-12-2012 10:31 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Neil, Syracuse has been flirting with the ACC ever since they were passed over in the first round of ACC expansion by VT. WVU and Pitt's flirtations are very recent things by comparison...

Well, it's done. So I really don't care anymore. It just doesn't matter who flirted with who the longest.

I've got to agree with you there, beej. It's all ancient history now...

(01-12-2012 01:10 PM)Butterfly Wrote:  A negative evidence cannot be used to validate a claim, a lack of said formula is not proof of anything. That is yet another logical fallacy on your part.
It's an opinion, there is no such formula, that's been my point the entire time.

Man is this what you pass off as intellect?
Someone says they can rate colleges and I say show what formula you use and you give this answer about a negative. I dont' see a negative. If I say Jordan is the best player and you say prove it- i can start with his number of NBA titles and his number of scoring scoring titles. YOu asking me for my formula is not a negative, I figure you just want to know how I come to my conclusions.

It's not an opinion the U.S. news has no formula. I've read a number of articles where the writers of the publication could not even write about the ranking because they did not know what the formula was. The link I have on that page is to U.S. News and it details their "formula" which is not a formula at all-really. So I guess it's not just an opinion- I actually read a few things.

And what does SYR not being in NEW YORK have to do with anything. Please re-read your post because you are wrong here. SYR is actually in New York. Where else is it if it's not in New YOrk. I went there and I tell you we all thought we were in New YOrk. Maybe you know better.

But thanks for spending so much time entertaining yourself. Afraid I'm hardly impressed or even insulted. You're just plumb nutzo in my book. You argued strongly against an opinion which basically reaches the same conclusion as your opinion. Now that's Nutzo.

You may have read my post but you heard what you think I would say and not what I actually said. My comments about the ACC had nothing to do with "prestige"- just retelling the tale of the raids which was the original topic of this post.


An example ofTiers would be Ivy league level, national colleges level, community colleges level- of course you have to break down the National college level a bit. But you don't say Harvard is better than Yale is better than Princeton- you say they are all in the top institution tier- which is pretty darn accurate by any honest opinion and evidenced by the number of students who tranfser from one IVY to another or do graduate work in an IVY arter graduating from an IVY. I however am not one of those students but there are a two Ivy league colleges in New York. Honest. Unless you know better.

Flaw in my logic? Your logic is clouded by emotion young jedi.

Syracuse University isn't exactly tiny...The school has approxiamtely 20,000 undergrad/grad students plus you have SUNY ESF literally next door and SUNY Upstate Medical a block away.

(01-12-2012 04:24 PM)Ottoman Wrote:  

(01-12-2012 01:10 PM)Butterfly Wrote:  A negative evidence cannot be used to validate a claim, a lack of said formula is not proof of anything. That is yet another logical fallacy on your part.
It's an opinion, there is no such formula, that's been my point the entire time.

Man is this what you pass off as intellect?
Someone says they can rate colleges and I say show what formula you use and you give this answer about a negative. I dont' see a negative. If I say Jordan is the best player and you say prove it- i can start with his number of NBA titles and his number of scoring scoring titles. YOu asking me for my formula is not a negative, I figure you just want to know how I come to my conclusions.

It's not an opinion the U.S. news has no formula. I've read a number of articles where the writers of the publication could not even write about the ranking because they did not know what the formula was. The link I have on that page is to U.S. News and it details their "formula" which is not a formula at all-really. So I guess it's not just an opinion- I actually read a few things.

And what does SYR not being in NEW YORK have to do with anything. Please re-read your post because you are wrong here. SYR is actually in New York. Where else is it if it's not in New YOrk. I went there and I tell you we all thought we were in New YOrk. Maybe you know better.

But thanks for spending so much time entertaining yourself. Afraid I'm hardly impressed or even insulted. You're just plumb nutzo in my book. You argued strongly against an opinion which basically reaches the same conclusion as your opinion. Now that's Nutzo.

Flaw in my logic? Your logic is clouded by emotion young jedi.

You guys are killing me.

(01-12-2012 04:28 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Syracuse University isn't exactly tiny...The school has approxiamtely 20,000 undergrad/grad students plus you have SUNY ESF literally next door and SUNY Upstate Medical a block away.

... You actually think I called Syracuse tiny?
For the love of God, I was talking about RIT...

Quote:Man is this what you pass off as intellect?

Intellect? No. A logical fallacy, that is undebatable, yes. Circular reasoning, is just childish.
Look, you can't just declare things this or that, and act as though, your having said that, makes it so. You disagree with the claim, I get that, but that's just it, you can disagree.
It's a matter of opinion what is prestige. There is no set standard, that we all have to abide by.
I get it, you think your **** doesn't stink. Everybody thinks that. I'm just not wowed by the like of Virginia and the U.
The ACC is a mesh, of good schools and diploma mills. So is every conference.
Just stop being so pretentious, that's all. No one cares about "prestige", it's about money.

That's it.


And I'm sorry, but proof cannot be found in negative evidence.
I don't have the formula used, so that must mean none exist... No, no fault in your reasoning there, some bottle up philosophy there.

(01-12-2012 05:23 PM)Butterfly Wrote:  

(01-12-2012 04:28 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Syracuse University isn't exactly tiny...The school has approxiamtely 20,000 undergrad/grad students plus you have SUNY ESF literally next door and SUNY Upstate Medical a block away.

... You actually think I called Syracuse tiny?
For the love of God, I was talking about RIT...

Quote:

You would also be wrong about RIT being tiny. Including grads and undergrads, RIT has a student population of well over 17,000. Not huge, but very far from being tiny.

Link

(01-12-2012 06:00 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  You would be wrong about RIT being tiny as well. Including grad and undergrad students, it has well over 17,000 students. Far from being tiny.

... I went to OSU, they have 52,000+ ... I'm sorry, but comparatively, it's dinky.
It's comparable to Miami University(of Ohio), both are under 20,000.
Oddly, Miami is actually a state university, though their attitude about their university, would lead you to believe otherwise. Ironic, given they have an acceptance rating of like 80%

(01-12-2012 06:06 PM)Butterfly Wrote:  

(01-12-2012 06:00 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  You would be wrong about RIT being tiny as well. Including grad and undergrad students, it has well over 17,000 students. Far from being tiny.

... I went to OSU, they have 52,000+ ... I'm sorry, but comparatively, it's dinky.
It's comparable to Miami University(of Ohio), both are under 20,000.
Oddly, Miami is actually a state university, though their attitude about their university, would lead you to believe otherwise. Ironic, given they have an acceptance rating of like 80%

How did I know that you would have a response like that? LOL. So, if RIT is tiny comparatively speaking, wouldnt that make SU also tiny, since SU only has about 3000 more students?

(01-12-2012 06:12 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(01-12-2012 06:06 PM)Butterfly Wrote:  

(01-12-2012 06:00 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  You would be wrong about RIT being tiny as well. Including grad and undergrad students, it has well over 17,000 students. Far from being tiny.

... I went to OSU, they have 52,000+ ... I'm sorry, but comparatively, it's dinky.
It's comparable to Miami University(of Ohio), both are under 20,000.
Oddly, Miami is actually a state university, though their attitude about their university, would lead you to believe otherwise. Ironic, given they have an acceptance rating of like 80%

How did I know that you would have a response like that? LOL. So, if RIT is tiny comparatively speaking, wouldnt that make SU also tiny, since SU only has about 3000 more students?

No, regardless of your enrollment, much bigger campus. You brought up the students not me.
So I stay perfect... :D
It's fun to step around things...

(01-12-2012 06:15 PM)Butterfly Wrote:  

(01-12-2012 06:12 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(01-12-2012 06:06 PM)Butterfly Wrote:  

(01-12-2012 06:00 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  You would be wrong about RIT being tiny as well. Including grad and undergrad students, it has well over 17,000 students. Far from being tiny.

... I went to OSU, they have 52,000+ ... I'm sorry, but comparatively, it's dinky.
It's comparable to Miami University(of Ohio), both are under 20,000.
Oddly, Miami is actually a state university, though their attitude about their university, would lead you to believe otherwise. Ironic, given they have an acceptance rating of like 80%

How did I know that you would have a response like that? LOL. So, if RIT is tiny comparatively speaking, wouldnt that make SU also tiny, since SU only has about 3000 more students?

No, regardless of your enrollment, much bigger campus. You brought up the students not me.
So I stay perfect... :D
It's fun to step around things...

Whatever dude. 17000 students is not tiny by anyones definition, no matter what. You would think someone who attended RIT would know that the college is not tiny.

(01-12-2012 07:24 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(01-12-2012 06:15 PM)Butterfly Wrote:  

(01-12-2012 06:12 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(01-12-2012 06:06 PM)Butterfly Wrote:  

(01-12-2012 06:00 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  You would be wrong about RIT being tiny as well. Including grad and undergrad students, it has well over 17,000 students. Far from being tiny.

... I went to OSU, they have 52,000+ ... I'm sorry, but comparatively, it's dinky.
It's comparable to Miami University(of Ohio), both are under 20,000.
Oddly, Miami is actually a state university, though their attitude about their university, would lead you to believe otherwise. Ironic, given they have an acceptance rating of like 80%

How did I know that you would have a response like that? LOL. So, if RIT is tiny comparatively speaking, wouldnt that make SU also tiny, since SU only has about 3000 more students?

No, regardless of your enrollment, much bigger campus. You brought up the students not me.
So I stay perfect... :D
It's fun to step around things...

Whatever dude. 17000 students is not tiny by anyones definition, no matter what. You would think someone who attended RIT would know that the college is not tiny.

The enrollment was just trivia, you're the only one communicating it's significance.
And yes, it is so a tiny school.
Although, they are adding to it. http://www.rbj.net/article.asp?aID=182762
If someone was to come up with a school at random, I highly doubt they would pick RIT.
You would think someone who's familiar with the place would realize that.

(01-12-2012 07:34 PM)Butterfly Wrote:  

(01-12-2012 07:24 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(01-12-2012 06:15 PM)Butterfly Wrote:  

(01-12-2012 06:12 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(01-12-2012 06:06 PM)Butterfly Wrote:  ... I went to OSU, they have 52,000+ ... I'm sorry, but comparatively, it's dinky.
It's comparable to Miami University(of Ohio), both are under 20,000.
Oddly, Miami is actually a state university, though their attitude about their university, would lead you to believe otherwise. Ironic, given they have an acceptance rating of like 80%

How did I know that you would have a response like that? LOL. So, if RIT is tiny comparatively speaking, wouldnt that make SU also tiny, since SU only has about 3000 more students?

No, regardless of your enrollment, much bigger campus. You brought up the students not me.
So I stay perfect... :D
It's fun to step around things...

Whatever dude. 17000 students is not tiny by anyones definition, no matter what. You would think someone who attended RIT would know that the college is not tiny.

The enrollment was just trivia, you're the only one communicating it's significance.
And yes, it is so a tiny school.
Although, they are adding to it. http://www.rbj.net/article.asp?aID=182762
If someone was to come up with a school at random, I highly doubt they would pick RIT.

And just what does that statement have to do with the schools enrollment? Just admit it dude. You were wrong about RIT being tiny. But you just cant admit it. But I'm done with this discussion with you. You didnt do yourself any favors in this thread though.

(01-12-2012 10:31 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Neil, Syracuse has been flirting with the ACC ever since they were passed over in the first round of ACC expansion by VT. WVU and Pitt's flirtations are very recent things by comparison...

And your evidence of this is what, exactly?

We aren't talking about "wanting" to be in the ACC, like WVU has "wanted" to be in the SEC like forever. If anything, SU probably has been hestitant about the ACC since the mess back in 2003 and with Cantor aboard probably "wanted" the BiG more than the ACC.

I'm talking about actual "pursuing" of membership.

WVU tried with the ACC through the back-channel with VT, but got the door closed in their faces rather quickly. Then they tried petitioning the SEC because Luck didn't like the fact that he might not get his way in terms of football expansion. He was probably flabbergasted when the Big 12 called and said they were interested in a WVU/Pitt expansion.

Cheers,
Neil