(10-06-2015 12:41 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(10-06-2015 12:30 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  

(10-06-2015 12:07 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(10-06-2015 10:43 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  In addition, the only public schools whose name does not have a -state-, -A&M- or -tech- actually in the club are:

Auburn
Clemson
Louisville
Pittsburgh
Purdue
UCLA

-Texas Tech also likely belongs on the list above as well as Georgia Tech.

Note that some well known schools such as USC and Miami are not public schools.

Rutgers

The State University of New Jersey, Rutgers

University of California, Los Angeles

I agree
Auburn
Clemson
Louisville
Pittsburgh
Purdue

Some of those are not like the others. Some are named after people while others are named after places.

And both Arizona State and Florida State are non-traditional flagships.

Neither were founded as land-grant universities and both states already had large, established state universities (which got the land-grant designation). Yet both rose to a level equivalent to the main state university.


There are only a handful of examples where: i) the state has an official, established flagship University of [state] and ii) a public university that is not a land-grant has risen up to be (close to) equivalent to the flagship school.

Off the top of my head, in addition to Arizona and Florida, I can only think of Alaska (UAA), Idaho (Boise State), Texas (TX Tech), Kentucky (Louisville) and Georgia (GT). (Of course, all supporters of the U of [state] in all of those states, including AZ and FL, can make arguments that the schools I listed aren't close to equivalent, in some fashion)

Didn't list Pitt or Temple because they doesn't consider themselves to be fully public universities and New York and California don't really have a single, official flagship and no public schools outside of the UC and SUNY systems come close to them, respectively.

(10-06-2015 10:43 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  In addition, the only public schools whose name does not have a -state-, -A&M- or -tech- actually in the club are:

Auburn
Clemson
Louisville
Pittsburgh
Purdue
UCLA

-Texas Tech also likely belongs on the list above as well as Georgia Tech.

Note that some well known schools such as USC and Miami are not public schools.

You do realize that Auburn was in what we call the P5 as a member of the SEC as "Alabama Polytechnic Institute" or A.P.I. but everyone in the country already called us Auburn because it was so much easier to use. We officially became Auburn because it made marketing so much easier to take the name of the town the University was in.

Not every state's flagship school is a land grant institution.

(10-06-2015 01:11 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Not every state's flagship school is a land grant institution.

There isn't just a single flagship for each state.

But it's true that not every University of [state] received the state's land-grant designation. In fact, I would say that more states than not used the land-grant program to found a new university.

(10-06-2015 11:20 AM)bullet Wrote:  Do you not understand what the "C" in UCLA stands for?

Its the same as the "C" in the University of California at Berkeley.

BTW, Vermont dropped football many years ago.

But they could still be in any of the major conferences for the other sports.

(10-06-2015 11:33 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(10-06-2015 11:20 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-06-2015 10:43 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  In addition, the only public schools whose name does not have a -state-, -A&M- or -tech- actually in the club are:

Auburn
Clemson
Louisville
Pittsburgh
Purdue
UCLA

-Texas Tech also likely belongs on the list above as well as Georgia Tech.

Note that some well known schools such as USC and Miami are not public schools.

Do you not understand what the "C" in UCLA stands for?

Its the same as the "C" in the University of California at Berkeley.

BTW, Vermont dropped football many years ago.

And to further muddy the California waters:

UC San Diego (not San Diego St, not U of San Diego) is top 10 in research in the nation. A major, world research institution.

But it only has DII athletics (for now, at least).

And of course this is why I just grant the status to the school that calls itself "California" and leave it at that. I knew UCLA and UCSD and maybe a couple of the other UC's are more or less at the same level as Berkeley but Berkeley is the original campus and the highest rated. I perhaps would not do the same for Cal State-San Jose (San Jose State), the original for those campuses.

(10-06-2015 12:07 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  Rutgers

This is true, however I chose not to include Rutgers since it is indeed a state flagship.

Isn't Cal-State in a separate system to the UC-s of various sorts?

OHIO is the first federal land grand university in the United States as a result of the Ordinance of 1787, also know as the Northwest Ordinance.

1804 OHIO
1809 Miami
1819 Cincinnati
1870 Ohio State

Ohio State was created with a federal land grant from the Morrill Act of 1862 when state politicians decided to create a new university in the state's capitol instead of giving the land grant to either Ohio or Miami.

State politicians would then insure OSU's status as the state's flagship when they passed the Eagleson Bill of 1906 which made it a law that OSU would be the only public university in the state allowed to offer doctorate degrees and conduct research. This essentially cut the other universities off at the knees as they fell behind over the next 50yrs until the demand became so great that they were finally allowed to compete. But by this point OSU had used its advantage to gain membership into the B1G in 1912 and had become the state's largest public university.

OSU is not the state of Ohio's flagship because it achieved the status on its own merits but because corrupt state politicians rigged the system so it wouldn't have any competitors. It's no surprise then that there are 8 FBS schools in Ohio, but only one gets to enjoy the spoils of being in the P5.

Correct, the Cal State's focus on one type of student while the UC's focus on another. Many of the Cal State's (especially Fresno State and San Jose State) complain that this hampers their ability to improve their academics and woo a major conference.

(10-06-2015 01:35 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  OHIO is the first federal land grand university in the United States as a result of the Ordinance of 1787, also know as the Northwest Ordinance.

1804 OHIO
1809 Miami
1819 Cincinnati
1870 Ohio State

Ohio State was created with a federal land grant from the Morrill Act of 1862 when state politicians decided to create a new university in the state's capitol instead of giving the land grant to either Ohio or Miami.

State politicians would then insure OSU's status as the state's flagship when they passed the Eagleson Bill of 1906 which made it a law that OSU would be the only public university in the state allowed to offer doctorate degrees and conduct research. This essentially cut the other universities off at the knees as they fell behind over the next 50yrs until the demand became so great that they were finally allowed to compete. But by this point OSU had used its advantage to gain membership into the B1G in 1912 and had become the state's largest public university.

OSU is not the state of Ohio's flagship because it achieved the status on its own merits but because corrupt state politicians rigged the system so it wouldn't have any competitors. It's no surprise then that there are 8 FBS schools in Ohio, but only one gets to enjoy the spoils of being in the P5.

Yep, I know the history you're referring to but didn't want to make the OP too long.

(10-06-2015 10:43 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  In addition, the only public schools whose name does not have a -state-, -A&M- or -tech- actually in the club are:

Auburn
Clemson
Louisville
Pittsburgh
Purdue
UCLA

-Texas Tech also likely belongs on the list above as well as Georgia Tech.

Note that some well known schools such as USC and Miami are not public schools.

Syracuse?
Wake Forest?
Boston College?
Miami?
Notre Dame?
Baylor?
TCU?

These are just off the top of my head .... I'm sure I'm missing some others ...

EDIT -- Vandy?

.

(10-06-2015 01:40 PM)Pervis_Griffith Wrote:  

(10-06-2015 10:43 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  In addition, the only public schools whose name does not have a -state-, -A&M- or -tech- actually in the club are:

Auburn
Clemson
Louisville
Pittsburgh
Purdue
UCLA

-Texas Tech also likely belongs on the list above as well as Georgia Tech.

Note that some well known schools such as USC and Miami are not public schools.

Syracuse?
Wake Forest?
Boston College?
Miami?
Notre Dame?
Baylor?
TCU?

These are just off the top of my head .... I'm sure I'm missing some others ...

EDIT -- Vandy?

.

Those are private.

(10-06-2015 01:42 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(10-06-2015 01:40 PM)Pervis_Griffith Wrote:  

(10-06-2015 10:43 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  In addition, the only public schools whose name does not have a -state-, -A&M- or -tech- actually in the club are:

Auburn
Clemson
Louisville
Pittsburgh
Purdue
UCLA

-Texas Tech also likely belongs on the list above as well as Georgia Tech.

Note that some well known schools such as USC and Miami are not public schools.

Syracuse?
Wake Forest?
Boston College?
Miami?
Notre Dame?
Baylor?
TCU?

These are just off the top of my head .... I'm sure I'm missing some others ...

EDIT -- Vandy?

.

Those are private.

Ahhhh .... there it is ... thanks ...

(10-06-2015 01:36 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Correct, the Cal State's focus on one type of student while the UC's focus on another. Many of the Cal State's (especially Fresno State and San Jose State) complain that this hampers their ability to improve their academics and woo a major conference.

Which is pretty irrelevant to the purpose of a university. California does it right with their two systems with different purposes. Texas is a total mess with the Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Houston, North Texas, and State university systems and a half dozen others independent. A&M is constantly doing things that increase their political influence, but make no sense for the state (buying a private law school in Ft. Worth, setting up a campus in San Antonio).

Yeah, for pure organization, Texas should merge some of the university systems. Honestly, it should be Texas, A&M, State and maybe Tech but UNT and UH don't need to exist as seperate entities but under the umbrella of Texas State. Some schools aren't even in a system like Texas Southern.

(10-06-2015 10:43 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  In addition, the only public schools whose name does not have a -state-, -A&M- or -tech- actually in the club are:

Auburn
Clemson
Louisville
Pittsburgh
Purdue
UCLA

-Texas Tech also likely belongs on the list above as well as Georgia Tech.

Note that some well known schools such as USC and Miami are not public schools.

I guess Rutgers, Marshall, Radford, James Madison, Mary Washington, George Mason. Christopher Newport, William & Mary, etc... all state public schools, may not count. Don't forget Temple.

(10-06-2015 01:47 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-06-2015 01:36 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Correct, the Cal State's focus on one type of student while the UC's focus on another. Many of the Cal State's (especially Fresno State and San Jose State) complain that this hampers their ability to improve their academics and woo a major conference.

Which is pretty irrelevant to the purpose of a university. California does it right with their two systems with different purposes. Texas is a total mess with the Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Houston, North Texas, and State university systems and a half dozen others independent. A&M is constantly doing things that increase their political influence, but make no sense for the state (buying a private law school in Ft. Worth, setting up a campus in San Antonio).

Minnesota also has a U of MN system and a MNSCU system. Although the U should really just be the main campus and a branch campus in Rochester to compete with/collaborate with Mayo. Crookston, Duluth and Morris should all be in MNSCU.


I agree that it doesn't make sense to have competing systems in a single state.

(10-06-2015 01:35 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  OHIO is the first federal land grand university in the United States as a result of the Ordinance of 1787, also know as the Northwest Ordinance.

1804 OHIO
1809 Miami
1819 Cincinnati
1870 Ohio State

Ohio State was created with a federal land grant from the Morrill Act of 1862 when state politicians decided to create a new university in the state's capitol instead of giving the land grant to either Ohio or Miami.

State politicians would then insure OSU's status as the state's flagship when they passed the Eagleson Bill of 1906 which made it a law that OSU would be the only public university in the state allowed to offer doctorate degrees and conduct research. This essentially cut the other universities off at the knees as they fell behind over the next 50yrs until the demand became so great that they were finally allowed to compete. But by this point OSU had used its advantage to gain membership into the B1G in 1912 and had become the state's largest public university.

OSU is not the state of Ohio's flagship because it achieved the status on its own merits but because corrupt state politicians rigged the system so it wouldn't have any competitors. It's no surprise then that there are 8 FBS schools in Ohio, but only one gets to enjoy the spoils of being in the P5.

Interesting history! Thanks for sharing that.

I can think of two other examples of where the modern, singular flagship in a state is named [state] State University, instead of University of [state]: Louisiana and Pennsylvania.

In both cases, there were already private universities established that used the name University of [state], now Tulane and Penn, respectively.

(10-06-2015 01:55 PM)chess Wrote:  I guess Rutgers, Marshall, Radford, James Madison, Mary Washington, George Mason. Christopher Newport, William & Mary, etc... all state public schools, may not count. Don't forget Temple.

It was meant to be a P5 list. Rutgers needs to be on there (another commenter noted their absence too). Marshall and Temple are G5, and the rest are neither.