PonyFans.comBoard IndexAround the HilltopFootballRecruitingBasketballOther Sports

Just posted on ESPN.com

This is the forum for talk about SMU Football

Moderators: PonyPride, SmooPower

Just posted on ESPN.com

Postby carolina stang » Mon Jun 14, 2010 9:39 am

"Your announcer is Bill Melton."
User avatar
carolina stang
All-American
 
Posts: 507
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 8:12 pm
Location: greensboro, north carolina

Re: Just posted on ESPN.com

Postby mr. pony » Mon Jun 14, 2010 9:41 am

Who you gonna believe? ESPN or burnt orange-poisoned Chip Brown? :)
mr. pony
PonyFans.com Legend
 
Posts: 4550
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 7:24 pm

Re: Just posted on ESPN.com

Postby Topper » Mon Jun 14, 2010 10:39 am

One thing I don't believe is that a collective "research mission" has anything to do with any of this. Schools that pay coaches multi-million dollar salaries while firing librarians for lack of funding are blowing smoke when they talk about sports and academics being tied to the hip. If UT is so interested in academics why don't they join the Ivy League.
User avatar
Topper
Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 2304
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 3:01 am
Location: 19th Hole

Re: Just posted on ESPN.com

Postby smupony94 » Mon Jun 14, 2010 10:49 am

Someone said that the Big 10 schools collectively split monies almost equal to what they receive from the conference from research grants
User avatar
smupony94
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 25665
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 11:34 am
Location: Bee Cave, Texas

Re: Just posted on ESPN.com

Postby peruna11 » Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:03 am

ESPN just reported TX stays put. ETA: it was a SC teaser right after the finish of the world cup game.
User avatar
peruna11
All-American
 
Posts: 936
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 11:49 am
Location: Dallas, TX

Re: Just posted on ESPN.com

Postby ponydawg » Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:09 am

said there were conflicting reports.....thanks ESPN.
User avatar
ponydawg
PonyFans.com Legend
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2002 4:01 am

Re: Just posted on ESPN.com

Postby peruna11 » Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:16 am

Yep... worthless. Just a Chip Brown retweet.

Joe Schad was the interview. Still thinks too late for B12. TX may be willing to listen, but thinks PAC is a done deal. Still looking like aTm to SEC. Utah better fit than KS for last PAC spot. MWC salivates for a shot at KS & Kstate.

Great work ESPN. Breaking news indeed.
User avatar
peruna11
All-American
 
Posts: 936
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 11:49 am
Location: Dallas, TX

Re: Just posted on ESPN.com

Postby Topper » Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:29 am

smupony94 wrote:Someone said that the Big 10 schools collectively split monies almost equal to what they receive from the conference from research grants


From SB Nation on the academic benefits of the Big 10. Something called the "CIC":

"What the CIC does do is four fold. First, it acts as a library exchange between it's member institutions, allowing almost instantaneous access to each member's extensive libraries. This is a big benefit is you're doing research on a subject that hasn't been covered at your particular institution, and it's a tremendous asset to your student population. Second, the CIC facilitates a scholar exchange. This allows member schools to solicit, borrow or in some ways "trade" faculty for set periods of time to allow their various departments to benefit from their expertise. It's an underrated aspect of CIC membership in that it allows schools to obtain teachers and researchers at limited cost and limits interconference pilfering of staff, allowing for greater continuity on those staffs.Third, and this is really just a thing for students, there's total credit reciprocity between the schools. If you've got credits at IU, they'll take them fully at Michigan, Ohio State and the University of Chicago. That's not bad. Finally, the CIC works actively to network its member institutions. The CIC works to bring together similar projects, funding opportunities, and other things like academic cooperation among the members."

So they co-ordinate lobbying for money. They don't split athletic revenue with their academic departments.
User avatar
Topper
Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 2304
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 3:01 am
Location: 19th Hole

Re: Just posted on ESPN.com

Postby Wuba » Mon Jun 14, 2010 12:55 pm

Topper wrote:
smupony94 wrote:Someone said that the Big 10 schools collectively split monies almost equal to what they receive from the conference from research grants


From SB Nation on the academic benefits of the Big 10. Something called the "CIC":

"What the CIC does do is four fold. First, it acts as a library exchange between it's member institutions, allowing almost instantaneous access to each member's extensive libraries. This is a big benefit is you're doing research on a subject that hasn't been covered at your particular institution, and it's a tremendous asset to your student population. Second, the CIC facilitates a scholar exchange. This allows member schools to solicit, borrow or in some ways "trade" faculty for set periods of time to allow their various departments to benefit from their expertise. It's an underrated aspect of CIC membership in that it allows schools to obtain teachers and researchers at limited cost and limits interconference pilfering of staff, allowing for greater continuity on those staffs.Third, and this is really just a thing for students, there's total credit reciprocity between the schools. If you've got credits at IU, they'll take them fully at Michigan, Ohio State and the University of Chicago. That's not bad. Finally, the CIC works actively to network its member institutions. The CIC works to bring together similar projects, funding opportunities, and other things like academic cooperation among the members."

So they co-ordinate lobbying for money. They don't split athletic revenue with their academic departments.

I see that they mentioned the University of Chicago, which shows that the CIC (or something equivalent) can exist in complete absence of the athletic conference.
Wuba
All-American
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2007 3:32 pm
Location: Dallas

Re: Just posted on ESPN.com

Postby Casey » Mon Jun 14, 2010 1:42 pm

Now there's a report that UT is meeting with the other Big 12 schools to gather a lopsided share of revenue from a new proposed TV contract — $25 million a year to UT, and $17 million to be split among the other schools.

That's about what has to be offered to make UT even contemplate staying. But if accepted, it will make the hatred for UT around the state grow exponentially.
Once a Mustang, ALWAYS a Mustang!
User avatar
Casey
All-American
 
Posts: 574
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 3:01 am
Location: Tyler

Re: Just posted on ESPN.com

Postby Prairiepony » Mon Jun 14, 2010 1:43 pm

Chicago was a member of the Big Ten.........until they dropped athletics. Big 10 was 9 until Michigan State joined in '53, that's the connection.
Prairiepony
Scout Team
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 3:37 pm

Re: Just posted on ESPN.com

Postby Wuba » Mon Jun 14, 2010 1:52 pm

Prairiepony wrote:Chicago was a member of the Big Ten.........until they dropped athletics. Big 10 was 9 until Michigan State joined in '53, that's the connection.

Thanks, I should have realized that. I still wonder why the academic arrangement in anyway has to coincide with the athletic arrangement other than to serve as a fig leaf.
Wuba
All-American
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2007 3:32 pm
Location: Dallas

Re: Just posted on ESPN.com

Postby Hoop Fan » Mon Jun 14, 2010 3:09 pm

Casey wrote:Now there's a report that UT is meeting with the other Big 12 schools to gather a lopsided share of revenue from a new proposed TV contract — $25 million a year to UT, and $17 million to be split among the other schools.

That's about what has to be offered to make UT even contemplate staying. But if accepted, it will make the hatred for UT around the state grow exponentially.


figures aside, this is why i thought the Big 12 (10) had a chance to survive if Texas waited over the weekend. basically, Baylor and the others were all going to be willing to give up varying degree of economics to hold the league together, whatever it took. I bet they would even come out of pocket if they had to. Just like paying an entry fee. The cost of getting left behind is too great. Which is why its so mindboggling that SMU was so willing to get left behind for so many years.
Hoop Fan
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 6814
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2000 4:01 am

Re: Just posted on ESPN.com

Postby Topper » Mon Jun 14, 2010 5:43 pm

Wuba wrote:
Prairiepony wrote:Chicago was a member of the Big Ten.........until they dropped athletics. Big 10 was 9 until Michigan State joined in '53, that's the connection.

Thanks, I should have realized that. I still wonder why the academic arrangement in anyway has to coincide with the athletic arrangement other than to serve as a fig leaf.


Fig leaf is an appropos term. There are numerous such consortiums of colleges and universities around the country that package research, degree plans, course offerings, library priviliges, etc. There is no particular tie in to athletics. It so happens that most of the Big 10 schools are old, well funded, research institutions with big enrollments. The fact that they are the premier football schools in their state probably has much to do with the same political clout that moves research funding their way. The state of Texas has a college co-ordinating board that divides money among the schools. UT and A & M of course get most. None of it is based on their abysmal football graduation rates.
User avatar
Topper
Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 2304
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 3:01 am
Location: 19th Hole


Return to Football

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest