• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

Which Teams Should the Big Ten Add? (please limit to four selections)

  • Boston College

    Votes: 32 10.2%
  • Cincinnati

    Votes: 19 6.1%
  • Connecticut

    Votes: 6 1.9%
  • Duke

    Votes: 21 6.7%
  • Georgia Tech

    Votes: 55 17.6%
  • Kansas

    Votes: 46 14.7%
  • Maryland

    Votes: 67 21.4%
  • Missouri

    Votes: 90 28.8%
  • North Carolina

    Votes: 39 12.5%
  • Notre Dame

    Votes: 209 66.8%
  • Oklahoma

    Votes: 78 24.9%
  • Pittsburgh

    Votes: 45 14.4%
  • Rutgers

    Votes: 40 12.8%
  • Syracuse

    Votes: 18 5.8%
  • Texas

    Votes: 121 38.7%
  • Vanderbilt

    Votes: 15 4.8%
  • Virginia

    Votes: 47 15.0%
  • Virginia Tech

    Votes: 62 19.8%
  • Stay at 12 teams and don't expand

    Votes: 27 8.6%
  • Add some other school(s) not listed

    Votes: 25 8.0%

  • Total voters
    313
BusNative;2266327; said:
I'd be in favor of booting Purdue in favor of UVa, UNC or Tech... no need to have two schools from Indiana, esp when one is a perennial zero-value-add. Keep IU because it's a flagship, go down the coast and gobble up flagship schools. I'd apply the same logic to NWern, if it wasn't such a good academic school.


Purdue is one of the top engineering schools in the country.

This isn't all about gridiron might.
 
Upvote 0
Hodgepodge;2266321; said:
I agree that the CIC portion of this is overblown. I could see CIC collaboration helping with major grants if it is impossible for one school to handle everything, but for most funding it likely plays no role.

Now, if the CIC really wants to get into steering money towards their schools, they could be a lot more proactive by lobbying their senators to get more major funds headed their ways. At this point, with the inclusion of Maryland and Rutgers the CIC stats' senators control just under a quarter of the senate, and with the addition of two more schools, that number would increase to over a quarter. The CIC could be a giant if that's what they want to do, but right now they don't appear to be that proactive.
Agencies like the NIH and NSF, which grant the vast majority of academic research funding, are administrative agencies, under the direction of the executive branch. Sure, they're subject to Congressional funding, but if you're talking about the Senate proposing a bill that says NIH/NSF, etc. funding will be dramatically cut unless they commit to sending X percentage of their grants to CIC member schools...I think that's a bill that goes nowhere in a hurry. As it should.
 
Upvote 0
ScriptOhio;2266330; said:
Come on now, nobody in the B1G is going to vote to "boot out" a "member school in good standing".

FCollinsBuckeye;2266331; said:
Purdue is one of the top engineering schools in the country.

This isn't all about gridiron might.

Yes, yes... I understand both. Still worthless, IMHO. Plus I hate driving through Lafayette (and the rest of that damn state) on my way to and from the Bus and the Chi. Give 'em the boot.
 
Upvote 0
Hodgepodge;2266321; said:
I could see CIC collaboration helping with major grants if it is impossible for one school to handle everything...
On this point, academic research labs collaborate all the time, and CIC membership isn't really a factor as far as I can tell. If you're running a research lab at OSU, and you choose to submit an NIH grant application in conjunction with a lab from the University of Florida, you do that. NIH doesn't care whether they're a CIC member, and neither do you.
 
Upvote 0
buckeyegrad;2266339; said:
Neil Armstrong and Gus Grissom hate you.

haters-gonna-hate-darth-vader-version.gif
 
Upvote 0
Hodgepodge;2266318; said:
The Feds aren't going to do anything major to Penn State. The leaders are now (finally) taking a more proactive role and the state is looking into changing their relationship with the state. Those things will likely satisfy the feds that although laws were broken, that they are making the moves needed so they won't happen again. That, along with the fact that coming down hard on PSU means economic Armageddon for Central PA, means that PSU is off the hook.

The Clery Act doesn't give a fuck about what they are doing NOW. It's all about what they didn't report THEN.
 
Upvote 0
I guess my question is if the University of Virginia, Georgia Tech, and UNC come to the Big 10 and Florida State goes to the SEC or some other conference which schools are going to share the $50 mil bye-bye fee because there won't be much of a ACC left:)
 
Upvote 0
Mike80;2266360; said:
The Clery Act doesn't give a [censored] about what they are doing NOW. It's all about what they didn't report THEN.

The DOE monitors and enforces the Clery Act, and the DOE cares about both then and now, as well as the future. While civil penalties are likely to occur (because of then), it is highly doubtful the DOE would bring the hammer down in the sense of denying federal student aid dollars to the institution (due to considerations about now and future).
 
Upvote 0
One more thing: the comments about UNC and potential additional sanctions against Penn State are, I believe, intended to caution its BOT against caving in to any of the demands of the lunatic fringe that wants to fight the NCAA and return Paterno to his throne atop Mount Nittany.
 
Upvote 0
zincfinger;2266334; said:
Agencies like the NIH and NSF, which grant the vast majority of academic research funding, are administrative agencies, under the direction of the executive branch. Sure, they're subject to Congressional funding, but if you're talking about the Senate proposing a bill that says NIH/NSF, etc. funding will be dramatically cut unless they commit to sending X percentage of their grants to CIC member schools...I think that's a bill that goes nowhere in a hurry. As it should.

I was thinking more along the lines of the pork that is added to so many bills. For example, if a senator in Illinois adds some pork that gets the University of Illinois to study the economic and ecological effects of rebuilding the Chicago Canal, if the CIC was a major lobbying force there would be ideally less of a chance that a senator from Iowa or New Jersey would be against it. Given how large an economic engine these universities are, it would be in the senators' best interests to bring those funds to the states they represent. That's not as it should be, but that is the way it is.
 
Upvote 0
Back
Top