|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Sept 2, 2023 15:51:45 GMT -5
btw, Purdue has won 3 National Championships, two in golf no less
Fresno has won 2, Baseball & Softball
|
|
|
Post by redcard🏐 on Sept 2, 2023 15:54:59 GMT -5
btw, Purdue has won 3 National Championships, two in golf no less Fresno has won 2, Baseball & Softball Purdue > Fresno State
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Sept 2, 2023 15:56:49 GMT -5
btw, Purdue has won 3 National Championships, two in golf no less Fresno has won 2, Baseball & Softball Purdue > Fresno State Fresno 39, Purdue 35. so says the scoreboard math Purdue paid Fresno $1.35 million to beat them. go figure
|
|
|
Post by redcard🏐 on Sept 2, 2023 16:00:17 GMT -5
Fresno 39, Purdue 35. so says the scoreboard math Purdue paid Fresno $1.35 million to beat them. go figure eh, Purdue can afford it!
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Sept 2, 2023 18:00:36 GMT -5
Fresno State football beats Purdue at Purdue, gets paid $1.35 million the Fresno market dwarfs that of Lafeyette just the absurdity of re-alignment. yes Purdue is academically much more elite, but then it's not about academics. and I love Purdue, just the winners and losers of re-alignment make very little sense. Purdue is worth $50 mil a year? lol, ahh for being in the right conference at the right time. Purdue was a founding member of the Big Ten back in 1896….lol, right conference at right time….try again. I think that's his point. Purdue got into the Big Ten in the 19th century largely due to geography. It's not really because they earned it on the field, and especially not in football. They have exactly one 10 win season in their entire history (1979) and zero 11 win seasons.
|
|
|
Post by jagdpanther on Sept 2, 2023 18:15:17 GMT -5
I don't believe that. That could have preserved their scheduling just fine with Stanford wandering in the wilderness. It's about preserving their ability to have the schedule they want. They risk not being able to with many other permutations of realignment.
|
|
|
Post by slxpress on Sept 2, 2023 20:09:16 GMT -5
I don't believe that. That could have preserved their scheduling just fine with Stanford wandering in the wilderness. It's about preserving their ability to have the schedule they want. They risk not being able to with many other permutations of realignment. But the importance to Notre Dame of having Stanford on the schedule lies to a significant degree on the fact they’re another school that approaches the student athlete relationship in the right way. Which goes back to academics as a factor.
|
|
|
Post by jagdpanther on Sept 3, 2023 19:35:38 GMT -5
But the importance to Notre Dame of having Stanford on the schedule lies to a significant degree on the fact they’re another school that approaches the student athlete relationship in the right way. Which goes back to academics as a factor. You have to be having a laugh at this point. You cannot seriously believe that.
|
|
|
Post by slxpress on Sept 3, 2023 19:49:21 GMT -5
But the importance to Notre Dame of having Stanford on the schedule lies to a significant degree on the fact they’re another school that approaches the student athlete relationship in the right way. Which goes back to academics as a factor. You have to be having a laugh at this point. You cannot seriously believe that. Nope. No laugh. I truly believe academics are important to specific schools. Notre Dame and Stanford happen to be two of them.
|
|
|
Post by Riviera Minestrone on Sept 3, 2023 19:57:59 GMT -5
But the importance to Notre Dame of having Stanford on the schedule lies to a significant degree on the fact they’re another school that approaches the student athlete relationship in the right way. Which goes back to academics as a factor. You have to be having a laugh at this point. You cannot seriously believe that. Here's the deal: I read each and every statement from the ACC hierarchy, university chancellors and presidents, athletic directors, etc. All of the hokeypoo about "common values", "academic alignment" and "for the best interests of our SAs" was just that: revisionist horse crap. I know for a fact that Stanford and UC Berkeley got caught with their proverbial pants down. At the beginning of the summer of 2022, they had no inkling about the sudden start of the Pac12's implosion and impending demise. To continue to be in... and recruit in...a P5 conference was imperative for both of them. Moving to the MWC? Nope!
|
|
|
Post by baytree on Sept 3, 2023 20:04:35 GMT -5
You have to be having a laugh at this point. You cannot seriously believe that. Nope. No laugh. I truly believe academics are important to specific schools. Notre Dame and Stanford happen to be two of them. Yes, it's quaint but academics are still important to Stanford and Cal. It seems like they're important to Notre Dame. I'm pretty sure they're important to most of the Ivy League.
If you look at college sports only from the money angle, it makes 0 sense. But Stanford has resisted doing that for decades and I don't see that changing with a new president or provost. IMO it's one reason Stanford and Cal were so slow to react to NIL and USC/UCLA leaving. Stanford really prizes the student athlete model. They're worried about athletes becoming employees, pay for play, diversity (giving preferences to athletes makes it harder for them to reach their diversity goals), and women's sports being underfunded in the NIL and big $$ football era.
|
|
|
Post by Riviera Minestrone on Sept 3, 2023 20:16:02 GMT -5
Nope. No laugh. I truly believe academics are important to specific schools. Notre Dame and Stanford happen to be two of them. Yes, it's quaint but academics are still important to Stanford and Cal. It seems like they're important to Notre Dame. I'm pretty sure they're important to most of the Ivy League.
If you look at college sports only from the money angle, it makes 0 sense. But Stanford has resisted doing that for decades and I don't see that changing with a new president or provost. IMO it's one reason Stanford and Cal were so slow to react to NIL and USC/UCLA leaving. Stanford really prizes the student athlete model. They're worried about athletes becoming employees, pay for play, diversity (giving preferences to athletes makes it harder for them to reach their diversity goals), and women's sports being underfunded in the NIL and big $$ football era. To be clear...yeah, I agree with your opening sentence. What I was mainly referring to...both in the case of Berkeley and the ACC schools fearful of a 3-team exodus in the future...is mostly the money angle.
|
|
|
Post by slxpress on Sept 3, 2023 21:15:20 GMT -5
Yes, it's quaint but academics are still important to Stanford and Cal. It seems like they're important to Notre Dame. I'm pretty sure they're important to most of the Ivy League.
If you look at college sports only from the money angle, it makes 0 sense. But Stanford has resisted doing that for decades and I don't see that changing with a new president or provost. IMO it's one reason Stanford and Cal were so slow to react to NIL and USC/UCLA leaving. Stanford really prizes the student athlete model. They're worried about athletes becoming employees, pay for play, diversity (giving preferences to athletes makes it harder for them to reach their diversity goals), and women's sports being underfunded in the NIL and big $$ football era. To be clear...yeah, I agree with your opening sentence. What I was mainly referring to...both in the case of Berkeley and the ACC schools fearful of a 3-team exodus in the future...is mostly the money angle. You’re introducing a new argument- an important, but still new - into the discussion. I was saying Notre Dame advocating for Stanford and Cal to be a part of the ACC was partially - not wholly - about academics. I’ve had a couple of people laugh at the concept, but it doesn’t make it any less true. The desire to be a part of the ACC is about money, or more accurately, about the desire to maintain a presence in big time collegiate athletics, which on some level amounts to the same thing. It’s the same existential question the Ivy Leagues addressed post WWII by divorcing themselves from scholarship athletics. It’s the same decision institutions which try to handle the cognitive dissonance of fielding a billion dollar commercial enterprise in the heart of an academic institution but try to handle that with as much integrity as possible, are wrestling with anew in this age of NIL and massive media rights for the Big 10 and SEC. Still, I maintain the advocacy from Notre Dame for Stanford and Cal admittance into the ACC was at least partially driven by academics.
|
|
|
Post by jagdpanther on Sept 4, 2023 19:45:16 GMT -5
Yes, it's quaint but academics are still important to Stanford and Cal. It seems like they're important to Notre Dame. I'm pretty sure they're important to most of the Ivy League. If you look at college sports only from the money angle, it makes 0 sense. But Stanford has resisted doing that for decades and I don't see that changing with a new president or provost. IMO it's one reason Stanford and Cal were so slow to react to NIL and USC/UCLA leaving. Stanford really prizes the student athlete model. They're worried about athletes becoming employees, pay for play, diversity (giving preferences to athletes makes it harder for them to reach their diversity goals), and women's sports being underfunded in the NIL and big $$ football era. Which is all well and good but it is a very, very minor reason for conference realignment choices if it plays any bearing at all. That includes the voting rationale of that school from northwest Indiana.
|
|
|
Post by baytree on Sept 4, 2023 19:59:38 GMT -5
Yes, it's quaint but academics are still important to Stanford and Cal. It seems like they're important to Notre Dame. I'm pretty sure they're important to most of the Ivy League. If you look at college sports only from the money angle, it makes 0 sense. But Stanford has resisted doing that for decades and I don't see that changing with a new president or provost. IMO it's one reason Stanford and Cal were so slow to react to NIL and USC/UCLA leaving. Stanford really prizes the student athlete model. They're worried about athletes becoming employees, pay for play, diversity (giving preferences to athletes makes it harder for them to reach their diversity goals), and women's sports being underfunded in the NIL and big $$ football era. Which is all well and good but it is a very, very minor reason for conference realignment choices if it plays any bearing at all. That includes the voting rationale of that school from northwest Indiana. How do you know it's a very minor reason? Ppl (and schools) value different things. Just bc it would be minor for you or for most schools doesn't mean it's very, very minor for Stanford, Cal, or Notre Dame.
No one is suggesting that it's the sole or primary reason. But I think that for Stanford and Cal, it's moderately important. I can see it being moderately important for Notre Dame. Swarbrick seems idealistic and Notre Dame also seems to value things like community and academics.
Q. Your friend and former co-worker Tom Froehle called me back after I interviewed him. He said to make sure I asked you the question about why you ended up returning to Indianapolis after law school. He said he couldn’t do the story justice. So let’s start there.
A. JACK SWARBRICK: O.K. (Laughs.) It was sort of manifest destiny. I was born in Yonkers, and my family moved to Bloomington, Ind., when I was 10. And then I went to law school out in Stanford. I was doing all my interviewing on the West Coast. Los Angeles, San Francisco, Portland and Seattle. I even finagled an interview trip to Hawaii. That’s what I was going to do. I was going to stay on the West Coast. Right at the point in time I was going to make the decision, I had dinner with a guy who had been a rector of mine, an assistant rector of mine, here. Father Tom Stella. He was studying getting an advanced degree in Berkeley. We were having dinner. I’m really all Bay Area at this point. I’m loving it out there. In the course of this dinner, Tom tells me that he’s moving back to Detroit. I said, ‘That’s crazy, why are you doing that?’ He said: ‘If you can live anywhere in the world, you ought to live here, because it’s fantastic. It has all this natural beauty, and the weather is great. As a consequence, so many people who live here don’t have a reason to be somewhere else. They’re attracted by those thing as opposed to something else.’ He said, ‘I need to be someplace where there’s a sense of community because that’s what motivates me.’ That was an absolutely light-bulb moment for me. I said: ‘That’s me. That’s what motivates me.’ On a dime, I switched and said, ‘Where can I get involved in the community?’ I thought in San Francisco I couldn’t do that. I thought I probably could in Portland and maybe in Seattle. But I really thought I could in Indianapolis. Part of it was my familiarity with that law firm and how much it was involved in that community. The other was sort of the sense of where the city was. I came back, I just gave a speech about this at the business school the other day. It was about how decision making is a lot easier when you know the why. Nietzsche said, ‘He who knows the why to life can bear any how.’ That became my why. If I knew what I really wanted to do, impact the community, that shaped everything else. It shaped the city and law firm that I went to. It just so happened that Indianapolis had just launched the amateur sports initiative. If I was 30 years younger and moved to Indianapolis today, I’d be involved in life sciences. It had nothing to do with sport. This was the economic development strategy that Indianapolis was using at the time. It was where I wanted to get engaged. As soon as I got there, I made a pest out of myself until I was allowed as a volunteer to be part of what was going on. That was sort of the start of it.
|
|