(05-18-2013 11:12 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  

(05-18-2013 07:54 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  i think more and more they should take the chance and invest in Buffalo. As long as Buffalo and New York state are willing/able to commit to going big time

Are you high?

Let me be clear. I'm not talking about grabbing buffalo tomorrow. The plan is LONG term 10-20 years. If buffalo made the commitment why couldn't they be considered.vwhwre were schools such as UConn Boise USF vtech etc wrx 29 years ago? Like I said new York should have invested in athletics 30-40 years ago but did not

(05-18-2013 08:13 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-18-2013 08:09 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(05-18-2013 07:54 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  i think more and more they should take the chance and invest in Buffalo. As long as Buffalo and New York state are willing/able to commit to going big time

The problem with Buffalo is it doesn't control its own state athletically.

That is the B1G expansion model; Nebraska, Rutgers and Maryland are the only game in town in their respective states for FB. UConn also has that quality going for it.

Buffalo is 3rd behind Syracuse and Army in New York State. It doesn't sound like the B1G way if they did take Buffalo.

Then why is Purdue in the B1G? They're not in the top 2 in their state...

I believe, Purdue is the state of Indiana's Land Grant institution which would make it the secondary public flagship institution in the state behind Indiana, similar to VT in Virginia. And in that state, yes, they likely would be #2 in popularity after Indiana.

It's always seemed to me Notre Dame is more popular in Illinois and the northeastern states than they are in the state of Indiana. But I'll defer to ND and Indiana fans on this.

Cheers,
Neil

(05-19-2013 10:50 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  

(05-18-2013 11:12 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  

(05-18-2013 07:54 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  i think more and more they should take the chance and invest in Buffalo. As long as Buffalo and New York state are willing/able to commit to going big time

Are you high?

Let me be clear. I'm not talking about grabbing buffalo tomorrow. The plan is LONG term 10-20 years. If buffalo made the commitment why couldn't they be considered.vwhwre were schools such as UConn Boise USF vtech etc wrx 29 years ago? Like I said new York should have invested in athletics 30-40 years ago but did not

It's simple. The SUNY system hasn't designated a flagship institution and it's land grant institution is Cornell.

The SUNY system has 4 University Centers - Albany, Binghamton, Buffalo, and Stony Brook. And they treat them all fairly. When Pataki proposed his Centers of Excellence back at the turn of the millenium, the original plan had no CoE in Binghamton, although there were ones proposed in Rochester and Syracuse. Guess who got a CoE, even though it's proven to be the most meaningless one along with Rochester's?

Guess which one got the best CoE? And if it took anyone more than 1 guess to say Albany (the capitol of the state) then shame on you.

New York and Massachusetts will NEVER fit the cookie-cutter mold of the flagship university paradigm. Buffalo comes the closest in stature, followed by Stony Brook, but Albany is where the power is.

Cheers,
Neil

All this discussion over an article that shows Delaney giving a non-answer because he doesn't want to flat out state that the B1G is done with expansion. And realistically he should remain noncommittal about their intentions because you never know what will happen in the next 5 or 6 years if you know what I mean...

The NYC office makes sense. NYC is the capital of East Coast media. BTN is a media enterprise. OSU, UM, PSU, and Rutgers are a huge chunk of college football fans in that city. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424...lenews_wsj

Pinstripe Bowl...more neutral site games in the Meadowlands (in warm September)...Rutgers home games for Big Ten fans in the region...the Big Ten is going to make a dent in the East.

Big Ten expansion is not "dead" but it is in a "coma".

Maybe Delany might like that word better than "dead".

(05-18-2013 08:12 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(05-18-2013 07:57 PM)brista21 Wrote:  

(05-18-2013 07:49 PM)Green Bull Wrote:  I think we have seen the end of FBS (except for possibly the Sun Belt) expansion for at least the decade. But, I can see UConn as a candidate for the Big 10, being in New England and near New York City.

UConn itself is in Stores which is closer to Boston than NY. That being said they may be a candidate in the long run. The problem is who do you pair with them? You need a western school of some kind in my opinion.

Right.

The B1G could look at Missouri or even Kentucky from the SEC as a pairing partner.

Uh,,,,No and No. Just will never happen. The B1G can't even pull another ACC school now. No chance of poaching an SEC school...

(05-19-2013 11:24 AM)omniorange Wrote:  New York and Massachusetts will NEVER fit the cookie-cutter mold of the flagship university paradigm. Buffalo comes the closest in stature, followed by Stony Brook, but Albany is where the power is.

UMass' own leadership pegged itself to PSU, Rutgers, and UMD back in the 90's.

Again, UMass today = Rutgers of the 1980's. Not a good place to be, but not a bad one, either.

(05-19-2013 10:50 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  Let me be clear. I'm not talking about grabbing buffalo tomorrow. The plan is LONG term 10-20 years.

Though in a 10yr-20yr time horizon, there could well be a substantially larger number of schools to pick from.

Heck, given a 10yr-20yr run at it, UConn might be able to pull itself up to AAU status, which would bring it into the frame for consideration as a 16th Big Ten school, provided a compelling 15th add is on offer (similar to Rutgers as a 14th when Maryland became available as a 13th).

(05-19-2013 02:23 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(05-19-2013 10:50 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  Let me be clear. I'm not talking about grabbing buffalo tomorrow. The plan is LONG term 10-20 years.

Though in a 10yr-20yr time horizon, there could well be a substantially larger number of schools to pick from.

Heck, given a 10yr-20yr run at it, UConn might be able to pull itself up to AAU status, which would bring it into the frame for consideration as a 16th Big Ten school, provided a compelling 15th add is on offer (similar to Rutgers as a 14th when Maryland became available as a 13th).

With that time frame, the B1G could go after more ACC schools or focus on the B12.

(05-18-2013 08:12 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(05-18-2013 07:57 PM)brista21 Wrote:  

(05-18-2013 07:49 PM)Green Bull Wrote:  I think we have seen the end of FBS (except for possibly the Sun Belt) expansion for at least the decade. But, I can see UConn as a candidate for the Big 10, being in New England and near New York City.

UConn itself is in Stores which is closer to Boston than NY. That being said they may be a candidate in the long run. The problem is who do you pair with them? You need a western school of some kind in my opinion.

Right.

The B1G could look at Missouri or even Kentucky from the SEC as a pairing partner.

(05-19-2013 01:58 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(05-19-2013 11:24 AM)omniorange Wrote:  New York and Massachusetts will NEVER fit the cookie-cutter mold of the flagship university paradigm. Buffalo comes the closest in stature, followed by Stony Brook, but Albany is where the power is.

UMass' own leadership pegged itself to PSU, Rutgers, and UMD back in the 90's.

Again, UMass today = Rutgers of the 1980's. Not a good place to be, but not a bad one, either.

It's a bad place to be because of the conference realignment situation, we should have been Rutgers of the 80's in the 80's. or at least the 90's when Whip was here.

(05-19-2013 01:58 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(05-19-2013 11:24 AM)omniorange Wrote:  New York and Massachusetts will NEVER fit the cookie-cutter mold of the flagship university paradigm. Buffalo comes the closest in stature, followed by Stony Brook, but Albany is where the power is.

UMass' own leadership pegged itself to PSU, Rutgers, and UMD back in the 90's.

Again, UMass today = Rutgers of the 1980's. Not a good place to be, but not a bad one, either.

UMass can peg itself all it wants, but Boston is where the power resides in the state of Massachusetts and the likes of Harvard, MIT, Tufts, Boston University, Brandeis, and BC are too much collectively for UMass to overcome.

Again, in Connecticut it's Yale and then UConn and in New Jersey it's Princeton and then Rutgers.

UMass in Massachusetts and the 4 SUNY University Centers in New York are too far down the pecking order to likely change the paradigm prior to 2050, if even by then. At least UMass is THE state public university, but that is still a tough nut to crack.

Cheers,
Neil

(05-19-2013 01:00 PM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  The NYC office makes sense. NYC is the capital of East Coast media. BTN is a media enterprise. OSU, UM, PSU, and Rutgers are a huge chunk of college football fans in that city. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424...lenews_wsj

Pinstripe Bowl...more neutral site games in the Meadowlands (in warm September)...Rutgers home games for Big Ten fans in the region...the Big Ten is going to make a dent in the East.

Call me biased, but I think DC makes more sense, especially if UVA continues to be on the radar and the B1G wants a front row ticket to federal research grants.

(05-19-2013 06:14 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  Call me biased, but I think DC makes more sense, especially if UVA continues to be on the radar and the B1G wants a front row ticket to federal research grants.

OK, you're biased. If you are aiming at becoming a two region conference, with the Midwest and Northeast, you'd have offices in New York and Chicago.

Also, the Big Ten conference office doesn't have anything to do with Federal research grants.

Rutgers I totally get, there is some historical branding there. Buffalo? GTFO! Will never happen. Syracuse would have been the fit, but obviously Rutgers delivers NY. Buffalo would do a better job of delivering Canada..and we all know how important college football is in Canada....

(05-19-2013 11:24 AM)omniorange Wrote:  It's simple. The SUNY system hasn't designated a flagship institution and it's land grant institution is Cornell.

The SUNY system has 4 University Centers - Albany, Binghamton, Buffalo, and Stony Brook. And they treat them all fairly. When Pataki proposed his Centers of Excellence back at the turn of the millenium, the original plan had no CoE in Binghamton, although there were ones proposed in Rochester and Syracuse. Guess who got a CoE, even though it's proven to be the most meaningless one along with Rochester's?

Guess which one got the best CoE? And if it took anyone more than 1 guess to say Albany (the capitol of the state) then shame on you.

New York and Massachusetts will NEVER fit the cookie-cutter mold of the flagship university paradigm. Buffalo comes the closest in stature, followed by Stony Brook, but Albany is where the power is.

Somewhat true. The CoE's came long after UAlbany started the route to a strong Nano college after drawing Alain Kaloyeros' know-how to the school in the late 80's. He worked hard to build it up, then got in the good graces of State Sen. 'Uncle' Joe Bruno, one of the '3 men in the room' typical of past state politics (later convicted and jailed for wrong-doing). Bruno brought the funding and it grew quickly. The COE was built around what was there, just like UB's CoE around our medical facilities.

Albany is the seat of power but UAlbany is not strong politically compared to UB and SBU. Guess what is proposed right now? None other than Kalyeros working with Cuomo to spin UAlbany's College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering off into its own SUNY unit: Link

If it happens, 0 CoE's for UAlbany and a huge hit to their research capacity. Meanwhile, UB has established its second CoE in Material Informatics.

(05-20-2013 12:39 AM)LSUtah Wrote:  Rutgers I totally get, there is some historical branding there. Buffalo? GTFO! Will never happen. Syracuse would have been the fit, but obviously Rutgers delivers NY. Buffalo would do a better job of delivering Canada..and we all know how important college football is in Canada....

How about being the University that brings a media market the same size as Louisville, New Orleans, Memphis, and Jacksonville when it finally found football championship success? We just need to find consistancy:

*The Bulls appearance in the International Bowl against Connecticut saw a huge ratings swing from 2008 to 2009. This year's game got a national rating of 2.12 (or just over two million homes) up 33% from last year's number of 1.59 between Rutgers and Ball State. Locally, the game got a high rating of 18.2 (70,400), and an average of 16.4 overall, in cable households according to Time-Warner statistics [airing on ESPN2]. It was the most watched cable show in four years, higher even than the Buffalo Bills Monday Night broadcasts on ESPN in 2007 and 2008. UB’s afternoon game on cable outrated San Diego’s overtime victory over Indianapolis (16.2) on Channel 2, the local NBC affiliate. It also outrated Arizona’s earlier win over Atlanta (12.6).

*Buffalo's 10,500 tickets sold for the International Bowl ranked it second among all non-BCS programs in terms of tickets sold for bowl games. Only Navy, which sold 16,200 tickets to its game in Washington, DC (the Eagle Bank Bowl), sold more than Buffalo among non-BCS schools. Among schools that Buffalo outdrew at the ticket window were Arizona, North Carolina State, Kansas and Wake Forest.

(05-20-2013 01:01 AM)RecoveringHillbilly Wrote:  

(05-20-2013 12:39 AM)LSUtah Wrote:  Rutgers I totally get, there is some historical branding there. Buffalo? GTFO! Will never happen. Syracuse would have been the fit, but obviously Rutgers delivers NY. Buffalo would do a better job of delivering Canada..and we all know how important college football is in Canada....

How about being the University that brings a media market the same size as Louisville, New Orleans, Memphis, and Jacksonville when it finally found football championship success? We just need to find consistancy:

Buffalo has the market, but it isn’t marketable.... There is no reason why Buffalo can't dominate the MAC. The conference has 6 schools in one state competing for recruits. Consequently, Buffalo should have been more successful in the MAC. However, it can atone for past performances by shocking the B1G and B12 and beat Ohio St and Baylor next season. It also needs to play in and fill a bigger stadium

(05-20-2013 12:53 AM)RecoveringHillbilly Wrote:  

(05-19-2013 11:24 AM)omniorange Wrote:  It's simple. The SUNY system hasn't designated a flagship institution and it's land grant institution is Cornell.

The SUNY system has 4 University Centers - Albany, Binghamton, Buffalo, and Stony Brook. And they treat them all fairly. When Pataki proposed his Centers of Excellence back at the turn of the millenium, the original plan had no CoE in Binghamton, although there were ones proposed in Rochester and Syracuse. Guess who got a CoE, even though it's proven to be the most meaningless one along with Rochester's?

Guess which one got the best CoE? And if it took anyone more than 1 guess to say Albany (the capitol of the state) then shame on you.

New York and Massachusetts will NEVER fit the cookie-cutter mold of the flagship university paradigm. Buffalo comes the closest in stature, followed by Stony Brook, but Albany is where the power is.

Somewhat true. The CoE's came long after UAlbany started the route to a strong Nano college after drawing Alain Kaloyeros' know-how to the school in the late 80's. He worked hard to build it up, then got in the good graces of State Sen. 'Uncle' Joe Bruno, one of the '3 men in the room' typical of past state politics (later convicted and jailed for wrong-doing). Bruno brought the funding and it grew quickly. The COE was built around what was there, just like UB's CoE around our medical facilities.

Albany is the seat of power but UAlbany is not strong politically compared to UB and SBU. Guess what is proposed right now? None other than Kalyeros working with Cuomo to spin UAlbany's College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering off into its own SUNY unit: Link

If it happens, 0 CoE's for UAlbany and a huge hit to their research capacity. Meanwhile, UB has established its second CoE in Material Informatics.

Congrats on the new CoE, but my point still remains. UB comes closest to being a state flagship with Stony Brook close behind, but Albany (not UA, but Albany) is where the power resides. And I have yet to see any evidence of the SUNY system being willing to designate either UB or Stony Brook as THE flagship institution of SUNY, despite proposals from both to make it so.

And should the state at some point decide to do this, the privates in the state like Cornell, Columbia, NYU, the University of Rochester, RPI, and Syracuse University will still have a great deal of power and influence just like in Massachusetts, so it will have about as much meaning as UMass has in that state.


Cheers,
Neil

(05-20-2013 07:15 AM)omniorange Wrote:  

(05-20-2013 12:53 AM)RecoveringHillbilly Wrote:  

(05-19-2013 11:24 AM)omniorange Wrote:  It's simple. The SUNY system hasn't designated a flagship institution and it's land grant institution is Cornell.

The SUNY system has 4 University Centers - Albany, Binghamton, Buffalo, and Stony Brook. And they treat them all fairly. When Pataki proposed his Centers of Excellence back at the turn of the millenium, the original plan had no CoE in Binghamton, although there were ones proposed in Rochester and Syracuse. Guess who got a CoE, even though it's proven to be the most meaningless one along with Rochester's?

Guess which one got the best CoE? And if it took anyone more than 1 guess to say Albany (the capitol of the state) then shame on you.

New York and Massachusetts will NEVER fit the cookie-cutter mold of the flagship university paradigm. Buffalo comes the closest in stature, followed by Stony Brook, but Albany is where the power is.

Somewhat true. The CoE's came long after UAlbany started the route to a strong Nano college after drawing Alain Kaloyeros' know-how to the school in the late 80's. He worked hard to build it up, then got in the good graces of State Sen. 'Uncle' Joe Bruno, one of the '3 men in the room' typical of past state politics (later convicted and jailed for wrong-doing). Bruno brought the funding and it grew quickly. The COE was built around what was there, just like UB's CoE around our medical facilities.

Albany is the seat of power but UAlbany is not strong politically compared to UB and SBU. Guess what is proposed right now? None other than Kalyeros working with Cuomo to spin UAlbany's College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering off into its own SUNY unit: Link

If it happens, 0 CoE's for UAlbany and a huge hit to their research capacity. Meanwhile, UB has established its second CoE in Material Informatics.

Congrats on the new CoE, but my point still remains. UB comes closest to being a state flagship with Stony Brook close behind, but Albany (not UA, but Albany) is where the power resides. And I have yet to see any evidence of the SUNY system being willing to designate either UB or Stony Brook as THE flagship institution of SUNY, despite proposals from both to make it so.

And should the state at some point decide to do this, the privates in the state like Cornell, Columbia, NYU, the University of Rochester, RPI, and Syracuse University will still have a great deal of power and influence just like in Massachusetts, so it will have about as much meaning as UMass has in that state.


Cheers,
Neil

Neil,

For political reasons, I don't believe such a designation will ever happen. With four campuses in the mix, you will constantly have a battle of three regions against one for anybody that actually pursued such a designation.

Even if a school were to obtain such a designation, it would take generations for people to think of the designated school as THE state school. The status of flagships in every other state dates back over 100 years, in some cases 200 years. A legal designation cannot create that kind of history or public perception.