Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Rootmaster" data-source="post: 129568507" data-attributes="member: 1428050">A lot of the problem with high levels of achievement for college teams in the Northeast comes down to perceptional and money based conflict between &quot;academics&quot; and &quot;athletics&quot;. Everybody wants scarce dollars for their self interest...and kudos for their work.&nbsp; Most professors etc see sports as a diversion or necessary evil.&nbsp; They truly don't care about an &quot;athletic program.&quot;&nbsp; How do I know this?&nbsp; First hand experience.&nbsp; I was fortunate to work directly on the elevation of a Northeast school's move from Div III to Div 1 today.&nbsp; Hurdles included facilities, staffing, competition etc.&nbsp; It was a rocky road to say the least.&nbsp; Bottom line is most colleges/universities in the Northeast hold on tightly to the school's missions: education and research. Presidents come out of a very academic focused background. They see big time sports as a threat not as a marketing tool to help their institution, department, area of interest grow and prosper. Students don't care as much either. Schools institute quotas for enrollment to include areas of the world who could care less about American sports,&nbsp; or sports in general ,for that matter. They want bigger and better class rooms and labs and help for those who can't afford to attend, but fight the athletic scholarship idea. Conflicting I would say. They see Texas high school level facilities as &quot;good enough&quot;.&nbsp; They see coaches as &quot;factory workers intruding on their turf.&quot;Because of money restrictions etc, most players tend to come from close in to the schools in areas where in high school a good football crowd is 65 moms and dads on any given day.&nbsp; Not exactly the South.And yes because they are used to pro sports the population in general views a lot of college athletics as just a short jump from Friday Night Lights.It is a tough environment to compete at Div 1.The ones that do success have had to work extremely hard.&nbsp; Interestingly however, a lot of our studies showed these same folks watching Ohio State etc on a Saturday afternoon.&nbsp; Head scratching...and part of the reason for Rutgers getting to the Big 10.&nbsp; Media money is passive and they don't have to pass a new stadium on the work to the lab each day.Just sayin'</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Rootmaster, post: 129568507, member: 1428050"] A lot of the problem with high levels of achievement for college teams in the Northeast comes down to perceptional and money based conflict between "academics" and "athletics". Everybody wants scarce dollars for their self interest...and kudos for their work. Most professors etc see sports as a diversion or necessary evil. They truly don't care about an "athletic program." How do I know this? First hand experience. I was fortunate to work directly on the elevation of a Northeast school's move from Div III to Div 1 today. Hurdles included facilities, staffing, competition etc. It was a rocky road to say the least. Bottom line is most colleges/universities in the Northeast hold on tightly to the school's missions: education and research. Presidents come out of a very academic focused background. They see big time sports as a threat not as a marketing tool to help their institution, department, area of interest grow and prosper. Students don't care as much either. Schools institute quotas for enrollment to include areas of the world who could care less about American sports, or sports in general ,for that matter. They want bigger and better class rooms and labs and help for those who can't afford to attend, but fight the athletic scholarship idea. Conflicting I would say. They see Texas high school level facilities as "good enough". They see coaches as "factory workers intruding on their turf." Because of money restrictions etc, most players tend to come from close in to the schools in areas where in high school a good football crowd is 65 moms and dads on any given day. Not exactly the South. And yes because they are used to pro sports the population in general views a lot of college athletics as just a short jump from Friday Night Lights. It is a tough environment to compete at Div 1.The ones that do success have had to work extremely hard. Interestingly however, a lot of our studies showed these same folks watching Ohio State etc on a Saturday afternoon. Head scratching...and part of the reason for Rutgers getting to the Big 10. Media money is passive and they don't have to pass a new stadium on the work to the lab each day. Just sayin' [/QUOTE]

Name