Did UCONN actually get an invitation or are we 0-2 on the thread title?

(03-20-2013 10:47 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  Did UCONN actually get an invitation or are we 0-2 on the thread title?

No, of course they didn't.

I first read about UConn's plans to gain AAU membership about 18 years ago. I'm not joking. They're really not that much closer.

This noise just comes from their latest press releases about how their going to invest this much here or there to move their research numbers up in the world. Well, guess what? 100 other universities are doing the similar things, including those already in the AAU. Everyone is fighting over the same pot of federal research allocations, so essentially, to move up, you've got to take it from someone else. (and AAU membership confers zero benefits for obtaining it).

Yes, the state of Connecticut wants to invest more in UConn R&D, and that's nice. I'm not saying UConn won't ever be in the AAU, but it is far from being right around the corner based on prior precedent of membership invitations.

But, seriously, there aren't many actual tangible benefits for being in the AAU for a university. It is simply a prestige thing that now has been seriously overblown by message board fans, particularly those with a Big Ten agenda. UConn won't be any different of a school the year before they get a hypothetical AAU invite then they would be the year after. And let me emphasize this...the Big Ten likes to check off that box if possible, but Wisconsin and Michigan were leading the charge to kick out UNL at essentially the same time the BigTen was bringing them on board.

(03-20-2013 10:53 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 10:47 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  Did UCONN actually get an invitation or are we 0-2 on the thread title?

No, of course they didn't.

I first read about UConn's plans to gain AAU membership about 18 years ago. I'm not joking. They're really not that much closer.

This noise just comes from their latest press releases about how their going to invest this much here or there to move their research numbers up in the world. Well, guess what? 100 other universities are doing the similar things, including those already in the AAU. Everyone is fighting over the same pot of federal research allocations, so essentially, to move up, you've got to take it from someone else. (and AAU membership confers zero benefits for obtaining it).

Yes, the state of Connecticut wants to invest more in UConn R&D, and that's nice. I'm not saying UConn won't ever be in the AAU, but it is far from being right around the corner based on prior precedent of membership invitations.

But, seriously, there aren't many actual tangible benefits for being in the AAU for a university. It is simply a prestige thing that now has been seriously overblown by message board fans, particularly those with a Big Ten agenda. UConn won't be any different of a school the year before they get a hypothetical AAU invite then they would be the year after. And let me emphasize this...the Big Ten likes to check off that box if possible, but Wisconsin and Michigan were leading the charge to kick out UNL at essentially the same time the BigTen was bringing them on board.

RE Paco:
1. I agree 100% with everything either in bold or underlined and think that it is worth repeating as many times as possible. I'm beyond sick of hearing all the silliness about how the B1G is bent on AAU status and how they are significantly better off for it.

RE whoever can change the title:
2. Can we change the title (again) to something not (incredibly) completely wrong and misleading?

(03-20-2013 06:54 AM)Fburghokie Wrote:  Thks

Bottomline both schools seem to cannot keep up to their peers. Except in some areas of athletics.

In the acc, the aau brand is basically a good house keeping seal of approval. It represents what most UNiveristy presidents want. Especially in the acc, the presidents rule and the commissioner is very very tight with them. Therefore, he's got some real good guidance from them.

The acc presidents want to be associated with schools that only enhance their schools brand .. And most of these folks are not sports centic. They are generally pleased with the conference...

(03-19-2013 04:42 PM)texasorange Wrote:  

(03-19-2013 02:01 PM)Fburghokie Wrote:  Lets clarify Nebraska was aau when they accept the big ten, after they were signed and sealed they left due to the schools desire to not maintain aau level of either broad research, faculty excellence or student standards / diversity.

Big 10 does not have a rule to kick out a member if they leave aau but bet they are not pariticipatimg In the big 10 research consortium . Includes all members including ex member UNiveristy of Chicago.

(03-19-2013 08:46 AM)TIGER-PAUL Wrote:  Acc was already looking at them.
Nebraska wasn't aau.

Actually it was the AAU that changed requirements. Nebraska & Syracuse were doing research in areas other than engineering & medical sciences.

Your post makes it seem as if Nebraska somehow became a lesser institution or made bad choices. That is completely untrue. Just because UNL chose to concentrate the majority of their research in areas that aren't among the categories that the AAU basis it's membership criteria on does not mean anything negative towards UNL. How can one fault them for wanting to spend their research money on agriculture with their FDA contracts when a a huge part of the state's income comes from agriculture? UNL is still a very good school and this decision by the university made since.

I read somewhere that the main issue with Nebraska was that their med school was a separately governed institution. It seems to me that somebody from Syracuse said that the fact that the Syracuse medical school was an affiliate of SU and not part of the university was also a factor in Syracuse getting booted from the AAU.

I'm simply parroting back what I read on message boards, so don't get too upset with me for not knowing what I'm talking about. It's actually much worse than that. I know so little about what I'm talking about that I'm actually paraphrasing (probably incorrectly) others who know nothing of the subject matter they're posting about.

(03-21-2013 12:22 AM)Cardinals Wrote:  I read somewhere that the main issue with Nebraska was that their med school was a separately governed institution. It seems to me that somebody from Syracuse said that the fact that the Syracuse medical school was an affiliate of SU and not part of the university was also a factor in Syracuse getting booted from the AAU.

I'm simply parroting back what I read on message boards, so don't get too upset with me for not knowing what I'm talking about. It's actually much worse than that. I know so little about what I'm talking about that I'm actually paraphrasing (probably incorrectly) others who know nothing of the subject matter they're posting about.

This was an issue as well, the med school is on the UNO campus.

I do think AAU is overblown to some extent. AAU means its a very high research activity institution. Traditionally, most ACC schools are more highly regarded for undergraduate education than their Big Ten peers while most Big Ten schools are more highly regarded for PhD programs and graduate research than their ACC peers. At the end of the day they're all very good and in a few cases elite schools.

(03-21-2013 12:22 AM)Cardinals Wrote:  I read somewhere that the main issue with Nebraska was that their med school was a separately governed institution. It seems to me that somebody from Syracuse said that the fact that the Syracuse medical school was an affiliate of SU and not part of the university was also a factor in Syracuse getting booted from the AAU.

I'm simply parroting back what I read on message boards, so don't get too upset with me for not knowing what I'm talking about. It's actually much worse than that. I know so little about what I'm talking about that I'm actually paraphrasing (probably incorrectly) others who know nothing of the subject matter they're posting about.

That's basically the jist of all that. Also, Syracuse wasn't actually booted they voluntarily left before that could happen.

(03-21-2013 12:40 PM)CardFANATIC Wrote:  

(03-21-2013 12:22 AM)Cardinals Wrote:  I read somewhere that the main issue with Nebraska was that their med school was a separately governed institution. It seems to me that somebody from Syracuse said that the fact that the Syracuse medical school was an affiliate of SU and not part of the university was also a factor in Syracuse getting booted from the AAU.

I'm simply parroting back what I read on message boards, so don't get too upset with me for not knowing what I'm talking about. It's actually much worse than that. I know so little about what I'm talking about that I'm actually paraphrasing (probably incorrectly) others who know nothing of the subject matter they're posting about.

This was an issue as well, the med school is on the UNO campus.

UNL's primary issue is that a disproportionate amount of their R&D expenditures comes from Department of Agriculture earmarks and corporate contracts, not from a peer review allocation process. This makes them an outlier to all the other AAU schools. It certainly doesn't help that the University of Nebraska System's medical school is in Omaha (not that some members like MIT and Cal Tech don't even have med schools). The AAU doesn't consider separate campuses or systems like that. It is interested in comparing data between like schools (not systems), and they all have the undergrad component and the issues that go along with that. That is why UCSF isn't a member.

Syracuse sold their med school to SUNY in 1950. It is not the same school, and honestly, it likely wouldn't make a difference even if it were as SUNY-Syracuse only reports $40 million in R&D (>$30 million in federal). If combined, that would only move SU from #156 to #132 in total R&D expenditures rank.

(03-20-2013 11:17 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  RE whoever can change the title:
2. Can we change the title (again) to something not (incredibly) completely wrong and misleading?

Wilkie01 is the author of this thread - he can change the title by simply making an edit to post #1, if I'm not mistaken.

I covered that in an earlier post.

(03-22-2013 01:07 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(03-21-2013 12:40 PM)CardFANATIC Wrote:  

(03-21-2013 12:22 AM)Cardinals Wrote:  I read somewhere that the main issue with Nebraska was that their med school was a separately governed institution. It seems to me that somebody from Syracuse said that the fact that the Syracuse medical school was an affiliate of SU and not part of the university was also a factor in Syracuse getting booted from the AAU.

I'm simply parroting back what I read on message boards, so don't get too upset with me for not knowing what I'm talking about. It's actually much worse than that. I know so little about what I'm talking about that I'm actually paraphrasing (probably incorrectly) others who know nothing of the subject matter they're posting about.

This was an issue as well, the med school is on the UNO campus.

UNL's primary issue is that a disproportionate amount of their R&D expenditures comes from Department of Agriculture earmarks and corporate contracts, not from a peer review allocation process. This makes them an outlier to all the other AAU schools. It certainly doesn't help that the University of Nebraska System's medical school is in Omaha (not that some members like MIT and Cal Tech don't even have med schools). The AAU doesn't consider separate campuses or systems like that. It is interested in comparing data between like schools (not systems), and they all have the undergrad component and the issues that go along with that. That is why UCSF isn't a member.

Syracuse sold their med school to SUNY in 1950. It is not the same school, and honestly, it likely wouldn't make a difference even if it were as SUNY-Syracuse only reports $40 million in R&D (>$30 million in federal). If combined, that would only move SU from #156 to #132 in total R&D expenditures rank.