Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

61 - 78 of 78 Posts

·
President of the Anti-Carbone Club
Joined
·
149 Posts
Stony Brook is not already well-funded. The state has decreased its funding yearly since 2008 even as inflation goes up. New York is the 4th most populous state in the country. Stony Brook's academic peers are Big Ten-level institutions and AAU research universities, of which our budgets and endowments - much less athletic prominence - is far behind.
 

·
Realist/A-hole
Joined
·
5,714 Posts
Your actual peers, whom you are competing for dollars with, are the other SUNY's. By those standards you are better funded. Maybe when your enrollment reaches Penn St. and Ohio St levels you can start crying poor. Right now the only peer school in the state of NY is Syracuse when your talking about the B1G.
 

·
President of the Anti-Carbone Club
Joined
·
149 Posts
It is the expectation that a Division I research university with nearly 30,000 students an hour away from the largest city in the United States would receive more funding than a tiny D3 college in the middle of nowhere and enrollment numbers in four digits.

One could argue the mere existence of the tiny SUNYs - and the millions that the state wastes to keep them afloat - has prevented Stony Brook from being the giant P5 it has the potential to be. The structure of SUNY is so inherently flawed when you are the fourth largest state in the country and have zero public P5s.
 

·
Realist/A-hole
Joined
·
5,714 Posts
You know that the state of NY exists outside of Long Island...right? I'm sure the thousands of employees in those small schools in already depressed economic areas would be happy to give up their jobs so you can have a nicer research lab. At least try to pretend that you are not so self absorbed that you can understand why it might not be a great idea to close down these smaller schools. There are real consequences to these decisions which affect peoples lives and livelihoods. Some people might not be able to afford to send there kids to such and academic power house like $BU. Some kids can't get into $BU and need these smaller schools as affordable realistic options for their college education. There is a reason why these schools existed in the first place. God knows I wasn't spending 40 to 60 thousand a year on 100 level undergraduate courses for my own child. It's why she isn't at UVM.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
528 Posts
It is the expectation that a Division I research university with nearly 30,000 students an hour away from the largest city in the United States would receive more funding than a tiny D3 college in the middle of nowhere and enrollment numbers in four digits.

One could argue the mere existence of the tiny SUNYs - and the millions that the state wastes to keep them afloat - has prevented Stony Brook from being the giant P5 it has the potential to be. The structure of SUNY is so inherently flawed when you are the fourth largest state in the country and have zero public P5s.
Stony Brook only has 16k full time undergrads, and that’s with the bump from Cuomo’s tuition-free program. Thats not significantly bigger than UVM or UNH (~12k each).

Stony Brook’s peers are the AE, URI, Uconn and Umass, etc. You're crying baby because NY has a decentralized state university system and you think SBU deserves to be a flagship school that can rival UT-Austin and B10 schools. We all see through it. It’s selfish and not in line with reality.

And I’m not sure about your “hour away from NYC” comment. Maybe an hour from JFK airport. Last I checked Stony Brook wasn’t even in Nassau county. Im not sure if once your East of Nassau your even technically part of the NYC metro.
 

·
President of the Anti-Carbone Club
Joined
·
149 Posts
Andrew Cuomo is a POS and I will never forgive that man for vetoing a $22M planned expansion for LaValle Stadium. Now, I'm no Republican, but I refuse to support anything that jackass does out of personal principle for screwing us over.

Now, last I checked, no one else in the AE or UMass and UConn are in the AAU. I would accept having UConn and UMass as peers, but definitely no one else in the AE, and not URI either. UConn and UMass have brands - Calhoun and Calipari-boosted as they are. SBU would have had flagship status if Eliot Spitzer had his way - he wanted to centralize everything in two locations, SBU and Buffalo. His plan never came to fruition which saddens me. Again, it's pathetic that the fourth-largest state in the country has no public Power 5 schools.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,808 Posts
As painful as it is, the restructuring is badly needed. Johnson and Lyndon have been in steep decline and you need to take a look at your eggs and realize when they won’t hatch. I like the idea of centralizing traditional 4-year programs at Castleton. While places like Bennington and the NEK are surely isolated, Vermont is still such a small state that we don’t need traditional residential state colleges in every corner of the state. On the other hand, low/no-residency Community Colleges that give out associates in nursing and dental hygiene are needed throughout the state. Shuttering Lyndon and Johson could free up resources to bolster the CCV system.

Perhaps this could make Castleton lot more attractive for VT & out-of-State students alike who previously would’ve never considered any of the VT state colleges. Maybe Castleton will be able to upgrade to the NE-10.

That said, the Chancellor is still too bold with this plan. I think it will be dead-on-arrival in the Vermont legislature. But nor will the legislature provide enough resources to get those campuses where they need to be. The Chancellor wants to chop the arm off on a butcher‘s block while the legislature will only be willing to give him a butter knife.
So, I have on pretty good authority from people I know who work at various VSC campuses that over the last two years, it was actually Johnson leading the charge in enrollments and recruitment among the schools. The decision to tie them in with Lyndon ultimately was going to do them in because Lyndon really sadly wasn't feasible anymore, and hadn't been for years. But, if you had taken Johnson's numbers just on their own and not as the entirety of NVU, they were okay enough to get by in normal circumstances for a bit longer. It sucks obviously with the struggles of the NEK to not have a higher learning place, but hopefully there's an emphasis on making sure the CCV system is bulked up like you said, especially in those areas.

As for Castleton, they made a lot of strides but recently they've been paying the cost. The ex-President of the school was really pushing and leaning into expansion, athletics, and more or less everything he could to distance the school from Johnson and Lyndon and this was kind of when the chancellor position wasn't really important and it was a "fend for yourselves" sorta situation up until maybe like 5-6 years ago. Castleton is hurting money wise, but because it was able to make a lot of improvements, and its positioning in the southern part of the state near the second largest city, that drove a lot of the moves. With VTC shuttering Randolph hurts, so it's going to be interesting how they handle the Williston move. To me the key is with Castleton and a reworked VTC absorbing the NVU schools, really needs to make sure it at least keeps some of the programs that can attract kids. The meteorology thing at Lyndon has some famous alums (Jim Cantore), and I think Johnson had a solid athletic training and it also absorbed the Vermont Woodworking School a few years back as well. Those program offerings at least help bolster the majors and attractiveness of a singular Vermont State school...furthermore, Castleton might have to rebrand if this goes through. Big part of the reason NVU went with the name was because having Vermont in the name helps give them more recognition out of state because kids don't exactly know where the hell any of those places are, and for any kid who gets a diploma from there, you have the name of the state where you went to school.

No way Castleton could even think about moving to D2. Even if they added 100% of the NVU and VTC kids (and thet definitely will not/will lose kids after this as well) to their current enrollment, they'd likely still be the smallest school in the Little East in D3.

It's the NE-10 schools that are likely not going to be D2 for much longer or are going to have to start finding ways to figure out what they're going to do. Those schools are going to take a big hit on this, and while athletic scholarships are a nice enrollment/recruitment tool in general; a lot of them are going to be in shortfalls and will need those costs to go elsewhere because budget cuts will definitely come to their athletic departments. Would not shock me if at least 5-6 NE10 schools after this push to drop to D3 (as some of them rightly should have been doing for years).

Also, in D3 - RIP half the GNAC, all of the LECC, and probably the NAC. Those schools are in real danger. it honest and truly sucks but this whole thing only accelerated what many of us knew was likely to happen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,808 Posts
Well, the VSC punted the vote to next week. It's getting a lot of pressure from politicians to not close them, and I agree you shouldn't be shuttering public college education. Gut tells me they'll save them for a year or two, and revisit. Hopefully with a fully laid out plan on what they actually intend to do with the Johnson and Lyndon campuses and how they're actually going to create a cohesive education system that offers public education for liberal arts, technical education and trades and programs that have a meaningful impact and will continue to serve the underserved areas they're going to cut off in the state.

But, now they aren't the first to do it. Urbana University, a D2 school in Illinois is shutting down for good. Urbana University to close due to coronavirus challenges, low enrollment

Also, interesting quote from the former Big 12 commish basically saying only give scholarships to "spectator sports" and the rest no scholarships at all and that conference affiliation can just be changed to regional to save on costs and budgets.


It's interesting but it will really show where schools have their priorities. UVM it's a no-brainer it's basketball, hockey, probably soccer, lacrosse and skiing. Any AE school with a combo of basketball, hockey, or football likely keeps all of them if the sponsor it. And I'd guess soccer and lacrosse would be priorities to the league as well.

My worry would be that the power conferences will use this to try and create a separate tier for basketball so the NCAA Tournament is basically theirs leaving the rest to fend for themselves in what's left of the NIT. If that's the end game, yuck.
 

·
Gr8t Dane
Joined
·
699 Posts
Cutting all non-spectator sports would violate Title 9. Any thoughts on the workaround there? Or am I missing something?
Wouldn't violate title IX if they balanced it with the same number of scholarships for womens sports as mens sports. The real problem comes when a school has football. That is a lot of ships for the males that need to be made up with female scholarships.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
5,947 Posts
I would imagine that proposal isn't as popular as Dan Beebe thinks. This is a man who, for most my my 37 year-old life, couldn't shake the perception that all he cares about is Texas football; from being the lead on the SMU investigation, to fusing the old SWC and Big 8, angering every Big 8 school not named OU, and overseeing three other conferences pick that league apart, while never convincing ESPN to take him seriously. I don't see him with too much credibility.

I also think there are a lot more schools and conferences who take non-revenue sports more seriuosly than what's being reported. Technically, hockey isn't considered a revenue sport, but you won't see schools in the Big Ten, Ivy, and this conference drop it. Lacrosse and baseball are in the same boat depending on the region. Soccer was supposed to go through this massive overhaul this week with the vote to expand the college season to be the whole school year; from what I've been hearing, that vote was supposed to just have enough pass.

That article does make a good point, though. I do think some schools were planning on cutting programs anyway, and will be using the corona virus to pull the trigger without getting negative blowback.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,808 Posts
VSC proposal was withdrawn: Spaulding withdraws proposal to close three state college campuses

Gonna go ahead and say when all this clears, Jeb Spaulding turns in a resignation letter.

A pretty good article on the situation before the news though. Speaks to the fact that the legislature for years has really not committed to giving VSC the money it needs (and what a real commitment looks like) and only now with it on the brink do they realize it/feign caring. https://www.sevendaysvt.com/vermont/as-vermont-state-colleges-teeter-lawmakers-weight-a-bailout/Content?oid=30248842
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
5,947 Posts
Eight schools have announced that they will be reopening this fall. They are the Universities of Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Missouri, Louisiana State, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas A&M.

I shouldn't have to explain why this was first reported by ESPN and not any other news source.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,964 Posts
Eight schools have announced that they will be reopening this fall. They are the Universities of Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Missouri, Louisiana State, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas A&M.

I shouldn't have to explain why this was first reported by ESPN and not any other news source.
Because college main purpose is for sports, education comes second..
 

·
Realist/A-hole
Joined
·
5,714 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
528 Posts
The NCAA also voted on the return of sports (interim decision to at least take effect June 1st-30th). Interestingly, they said basketball programs can "voluntarily" return to activities; I'm assuming that means for summer practice for 2020-21 season, which I believe can legally start later in the month?

This is the direction I thought they'd go in; a very "light touch" approach that gives the conferences a fairly wide degree of autonomy and opens to the door to SEC and possibly Big 10 (no fans of course) football in the fall. It will be up to each state and university to develop their own testing protocols.
 

·
Realist/A-hole
Joined
·
5,714 Posts
The NCAA also voted on the return of sports (interim decision to at least take effect June 1st-30th). Interestingly, they said basketball programs can "voluntarily" return to activities; I'm assuming that means for summer practice for 2020-21 season, which I believe can legally start later in the month?

This is the direction I thought they'd go in; a very "light touch" approach that gives the conferences a fairly wide degree of autonomy and opens to the door to SEC and possibly Big 10 (no fans of course) football in the fall. It will be up to each state and university to develop their own testing protocols.
Passing the buck minimizes their chances of getting sued. They have enough problems with that already.
 
61 - 78 of 78 Posts
Top