Power 5 realignment
-
I've never heard of being a Land Grant university as one of the determining factors for adding a school to the B1G. Not that it is incorrect, I've just never heard that. Competitiveness, TV Market, location, culture, academics, etc... Yeah. But not land grant.
That got me interested so I did some quick googling (mainly wondering why Michigan and the other three weren't). It looks like these were based off of legislation from 1862. Those four universities were founded earlier than that. Michigan was all of the way back in 1817. I imagine this is why Michigan, Indiana, etc aren't Land Grant Universities.
I've never heard of being a Land Grant university as one of the determining factors for adding a school to the B1G. Not that it is incorrect, I've just never heard that. Competitiveness, TV Market, location, culture, academics, etc... Yeah. But not land grant.
That got me interested so I did some quick googling (mainly wondering why Michigan and the other three weren't). It looks like these were based off of legislation from 1862. Those four universities were founded earlier than that. Michigan was all of the way back in 1817. I imagine this is why Michigan, Indiana, etc aren't Land Grant Universities.
I don't know if "Land grant" status is...or would be a major criteria now.....but it may be a minor one. But in the past I am pretty sure it was a big issue. Perhaps Mich/Iowa/Indiana were private at one time before becoming public.....here is what I found:
Indiana was founded as a state seminary in 1820. Name changed from Indiana State Seminary to Indiana college in 1828. 1838 became Indiana University.
Iowa was founded as Iowa University in 1847....but before the Land Grant statute.
Michigan was founded in 1817 as the Catholepistemiad, or The University of Michigania....in Detroit. It moved to Ann Arbor in 1837.
Northwestern was founded in 1851 supposedly to serve "the Northwest Territory"....except the "Northwest Territory ceased to exist before the school was founded. All the states that made up the Northwest Territory except one: Minnesota, were admitted to the union some long before the school was founded: Ohio 1803, Indiana 1816, Illinois 1818, Michign 1837, Iowa 1846, Wisconsin 1848, Minnesota 1858. So, the name doesn't make sense. But it was founded as a private school...and remains so.
-
Basically, the 4 schools that aren't land grant came to be before land grant universities were a thing
-
Well, I was going for expansion rather than contraction. As for "tiers" the NCAA doesn't recognize tiers among the schools I have mentioned...though we know they exist. (yes, some of those MWC schools may be tantamount to MAC level schools....but unlike MAC schools, those schools are the top level in their states).
As for TCU....the fact is they have been the most competitive school in Texas the last decade...., so I see no more compelling reason than that to include them....and there are stadiums in Dallas that they can play in if need be....including the Jerry Dome.
They don't need to play there. No one goes to their games.
They don't need to play there. No one goes to their games.
Well, I don't know. They have been putting on the best show and winning the most games in Texas for like a decade now. In 2008 they finished #7 nationally, 2009 #6, 2010 #2, 2014 #3.
And , I see that they have expanded their stadium from like 32,000 to about 45,000 in just the last few years. They put in 164 million in renovation to it.
Here were the attendance figures for all Texas schools for 2013:
Hereβs how the area teams break down. [Number of home games / Total attendance at home games / average]....and 2014 next to it:
1. Texas β 6 / 593,897 / 98,976....94,103
2. Texas A&M β 8 / 697,003 / 87,125...105,123
3. Oklahoma β 6 / 508,334 / 84,722
4. Texas Tech β 6 / 347,597 / 57,933...58,935
5. Baylor β 7 / 321,639 / 45,948...46,710
6. TCU β 6 / 261,587 / 43,598...44,719
7. UNT β 6 / 126,182 / 21,030
8. SMU β 6 / 112,347 / 18,725....21,528
9. Houston..............................28,311
It seems that 44,719 is pretty good. I wouldn't say that is nobody.
And TCU is right in the heart of Cowboys country...so naturally there is more of an affinity around there to attend Cowboys games than college football. Plus SMU is nearby.
There are no Pro teams down around the area where Texas and A&M play. That could be a bit of a factor.
-
First, stop citing results in a discussion about attendance. Second, if If they're actually getting 44K then fine, that's adequate, but they're not. Name another P5 team that would do this for a CONFERENCE game, ESPECIALLY with all the success they've had:
-
Its halftime, its Texas. Everybody's gone for a beer. Nothing unusual about that look.
Show me a photo in the middle of the 4th quarter where it is 10-10.
-
They don't sell beer at the games. Stadium food/drinks are very unpopular down here since they're terrible and you can load up at the tailgate. I'll see if I can find the game on YouTube and take a screenshot later in the game.
-
If it helps, I think this is that game
-
Yeah I have a bunch of awesome 4th quarter, 7-point game, screenshots of the teams on the sideline and the front 3 rows that they're showing are all virtually empty. I don't know why Patterson shows the school so much loyalty when they're clearly not reciprocating it. He would be the best hire any school could make, yet no one's been able to.
Then again some guys just do better at the smaller schools. A big chunk of big time coaching is egos management. No one knows whether Patterson is worth a darn or not in that department.
-
Yeah I have a bunch of awesome 4th quarter, 7-point game, screenshots of the teams on the sideline and the front 3 rows that they're showing are all virtually empty. I don't know why Patterson shows the school so much loyalty when they're clearly not reciprocating it. He would be the best hire any school could make, yet no one's been able to.
Then again some guys just do better at the smaller schools. A big chunk of big time coaching is egos management. No one knows whether Patterson is worth a darn or not in that department.
Yeah I have a bunch of awesome 4th quarter, 7-point game, screenshots of the teams on the sideline and the front 3 rows that they're showing are all virtually empty. I don't know why Patterson shows the school so much loyalty when they're clearly not reciprocating it. He would be the best hire any school could make, yet no one's been able to.
Then again some guys just do better at the smaller schools. A big chunk of big time coaching is egos management. No one knows whether Patterson is worth a darn or not in that department.
See: Saban, Nick.
-
Very, very good at it.
-
Additional note: East Carolina average attendance for the last 5 years fluctuated between 45-50K
NC State averages about 53K
NC's average was 51,500
Wake about 28,000
Duke about 26,000.
So, attendance/competitive wise, ECU is NOT the weak sister in that state of FBS programs, not at all.
Additional note: East Carolina average attendance for the last 5 years fluctuated between 45-50K
NC State averages about 53K
NC's average was 51,500
Wake about 28,000
Duke about 26,000.
So, attendance/competitive wise, ECU is NOT the weak sister in that state of FBS programs, not at all.
I like the idea of ECU in the SEC. They are almost the bully of the state as it is.....give them the ability to recruit kids as a SEC school, ECU would own the recruiting in North Carolina and bully up real quick..
-
Additional note: East Carolina average attendance for the last 5 years fluctuated between 45-50K
NC State averages about 53K
NC's average was 51,500
Wake about 28,000
Duke about 26,000.
So, attendance/competitive wise, ECU is NOT the weak sister in that state of FBS programs, not at all.
I like the idea of ECU in the SEC. They are almost the bully of the state as it is.....give them the ability to recruit kids as a SEC school, ECU would own the recruiting in North Carolina and bully up real quick..
I like the idea of ECU in the SEC. They are almost the bully of the state as it is.....give them the ability to recruit kids as a SEC school, ECU would own the recruiting in North Carolina and bully up real quick..
I don't know if ECU plays NC, NS St., Duke, Wake....but if they do I suggest they do very well against them. My idea is for the SEC to expand into NC....but not take away any of the current NC schools away from the ACC. ECU could be a fit.
-
-
They will pick one off from the ACC.
Why? You already said that Fla. would veto FSU. That SC would veto Clemson.
I think the only one that might make the jump is NC St. How about you? They may not like playing third fiddle to Duke/NC...in basketball at least. I don't think NC St. feels the same about their role in football versus those other two.
-
Right. Won't be FSU or Clemson. One of the NC schools and/or one of the Virginia schools.
-
Right. Won't be FSU or Clemson. One of the NC schools and/or one of the Virginia schools.
Right. Won't be FSU or Clemson. One of the NC schools and/or one of the Virginia schools.
I doubt it would be Virginia....but it could be Va A&M (Tech). They have kind of actually moved all over. From the Southern to the Big East to the ACC they have been somewhat nomadic. If they saw more prestige and more money, sure, they might jump.
(but...as noted, the ACC dominated the SEC this past year.....so it could be argued that they would be making a lateral move at best in terms of overall football competition)
-
Virginia would probably stick its nose up at SEC academics. VT is fine. Better cultural fit anyway. At least that's what I've heard.
Yes they should make a 30-50 year decision based on the results of 1 year....
-
I don't think anyone believes the ACC will be even with the SEC any time soon
-
I don't think anyone believes the ACC will be even with the SEC any time soon
Last year they weren't even....they were better. In terms of head to head matchups. (so....maybe you are right.....just not in the way you thought you were right.)
-
Virginia would probably stick its nose up at SEC academics. VT is fine. Better cultural fit anyway. At least that's what I've heard.
Yes they should make a 30-50 year decision based on the results of 1 year....
Virginia would probably stick its nose up at SEC academics. VT is fine. Better cultural fit anyway. At least that's what I've heard.
Yes they should make a 30-50 year decision based on the results of 1 year....
OK, what does that mean "better cultural fit". Though I kinda think I know what you need to explain that one to me needs further explanation.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better π
Register Login