-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
Idaho, Utah St and SJSU kicked to the curb: BSC?
- Thread starter Silvertip
- Start date
Screamin_Eagle174
Well-known member
:lol: Black EYE. Damn sentence breaks.AZGrizFan said:Screamin_Eagle174 said:
Freudian slip, hmmmm?
bincitysioux
Well-known member
Screamin_Eagle174 said:
Pretty much everybody (maybe not Portland St.) has to get on an airplane to get to Sacramento. Once you board the plane, does it matter money-wise if you'r going to Sacramento or Grand Forks? I think not.
I figure we all like to recruit California. With Poly and Davis on board we still can. Might as well toss the Hornets to the curb. At least we won't all have to go play in the cracker-jack box gym for basketball every year.............
UNC is testing my patience, but I still think they'll end up being solid. They were damn good for a long time in the best conference in DII. I can attest to that........................
Screamin_Eagle174
Well-known member
bincitysioux said:
It does, because longer flights are more expensive. All the other schools in the conference are within the same geographic footprint... UND is something like 600 or 800 miles further. What's your beef with Sac State?
Tokyogriz
Well-known member
Tod said:
Your right I have seen UC Davis as well. All the Cali schools have large enrollments and attract more $$ in general, (even though Ive seen zero from Sac State in academic or public press).
Poly and UC Davis could go up they just dont want to as Cali is saturated with FBS level schools. Being in Cali really allows them to hardly need the PR boost from prospective students UM would get from being in a FBS level. Fairly large cali schools are already on many prospective students lists, UM on the other hand is most often not and IMO just being on TV often with larger schools will increase UMs attendence over the years. A larger UM say 25,000 to 30,000 students instead of 14,000 would be a huge boost to Missoula and the state economically.
The idea of moving up isnt just about winning or losing its about wanting our university to grow. Put UM on the Map lets get more students! The schools we affiliate with do matter in the overall recruiting picture for all students athlette and NON athlete alike. More students equals more money for Missoula and the state of montana. Especially the out of state kids being in a larger conference would potentially attract.
Grizaholic16
Well-known member
All this talk about UM and it's academic standard is exhausting.
UM has made GREAT strides in the past 30 years with all of its programs.
The Business school is by far one of the biggest highlights. Extremely successful people have walked through those doors.
The Journalism school was noted as being great, which is also true. We have many acclaimed writers and scholars.
The Law school is magnificent.
The Physical Therapy School produces the finest.
And what I'm a part of is the Pharmacy School which is ranked 12th nationally out of over 115 pharmacy schools in the nation. Saying that UM lacks academic standard is bogus. The Biomedical Sciences department alone rakes in about $60 million in grant money.
Anyway, just thought I would try and clear some of that air. UM is not lacking in any academic standard.
UM has made GREAT strides in the past 30 years with all of its programs.
The Business school is by far one of the biggest highlights. Extremely successful people have walked through those doors.
The Journalism school was noted as being great, which is also true. We have many acclaimed writers and scholars.
The Law school is magnificent.
The Physical Therapy School produces the finest.
And what I'm a part of is the Pharmacy School which is ranked 12th nationally out of over 115 pharmacy schools in the nation. Saying that UM lacks academic standard is bogus. The Biomedical Sciences department alone rakes in about $60 million in grant money.
Anyway, just thought I would try and clear some of that air. UM is not lacking in any academic standard.
bincitysioux said:
I'd go for that. Ever notice that whenever a conference school begins crying about travel costs, it's always one of the commuter schools? I have never heard a flagship university in the Big Sky conference cry about travel costs. That's the difference between being the best university in your state and being a tweener school for students too good for community college but unworthy of the state's best school.
Eastern is a tweener school. I give it all due credit for winning a national title, but also know that it was just 16 years ago that Washington considered dropping EWU football entirely -- at a time when the Eagles were gearing up for a semifinal playoff run. What conference benefits from schools that can only schedule four home games a season, a year after winning a national championship?
Does Eastern have a multi-million stadium expansion plan? Sure, but pretty much every school has some architect's rendition of their expanded stadium. Show us the bricks, Eastern. The only big changes I've seen is the colored rug and some high school bleachers. 9,100 fans?? There's more than 430k people in the greater Spokane CDA area. You could fill Martin Stadium and the Kibble Dome every Saturday -- not that that ever happens, but it could-- and there would still be nearly 400k people within a hours drive of Cheney who just don't give a crap about EWU and never will. And here's the real rub: many of those who could care less are Eastern alumni.
Seriously, Eastern is a fun opponent for Montana, even though the wins in the "rivalry" are extremely lopsided in Montana's favor. But no one in their right mind would suggest Eastern has more going for it than North Dakota. Sure there's no mascot controversy, but the nation pretty much knows what the Fighting Sioux are fighting for and many people have an opinion about it. I bet I could stand in the parking lot of Dick's Drive In in Spokane and only find a handful of people who even know what Eastern's mascot is.
BigSkyBears
Well-known member
Tokyogriz said:
okay frat boy, at least my "junior college" taught me how to construct coherent sentences. Here's something you wrote on another thread. "After the MSU crack murdering athletes a couple years ago with a side of testicles down the throat MSU still has issues." http://www.egriz.com/grizboard/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=56073" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Kid, if you do the research, you'll find out that UNC is actually a pretty good school. Btw, it's UNC or NC, not NCU.
Since we're measuring academic wieners here, it should be pointed out that football-only member UC Davis has the best pedigree of all Big Sky schools. It's one of the best plant and animal science schools in the nation. I'm sure the Davis faculty wouldn't consider MSU a peer institution.
UM has a very small campus...just where are these additional 12,000 students going to live, study, etc? It would serve a better purpose to deal with the hand you have..and to look to create a high selectivity school, like the UCs and Cal States, in Butte at Mt. Tech.....it is already recognnized internationally. Expand that school and its engineering and high tech offerings would bring more returns to a state badly in need of development in poor areas...it would be a win for all schools and the state.Tokyogriz said:
having worked UM/higher education for twenty years, my take
UM simply does not have the infrastructure nor the financial resources to become the much larger state or flagship state school. BOth factors due to low and diminishing financial and related support from regent/legislative will. Both of former like to talk the game but are unwilling to fund it.
UM has adequate and competitive undergrad options for an institution its size and location. However it is in its graduate programs that it excells (in spite of the lack of funding) these probrams, Pharmacy, Business, Forestry, Journalism, and many related Bio-Med programs hold their own with both private and public institutions nationally and internationally.
Currently the total enrollment on UM/COT is just shy of 16K and I know from experience that current funding does not meet the needs of an academic institution. I am old enough to remember the '4 year degree' - well, the average UM student needs in the vincinity of 5 years now to get that 4 year degree. A lot due to lack of class access, instructors, lab facilities, tech access, etc....and it goes on. In short we cannot handle what we have currently. Sure more students mean more dollars but there are simply not the numbers of students available given MT and greater NW demographics.
I would prefer that UM sharpen its focus on what it has and somehow convince the policy makers across the state to bolster education with more investment.
UM simply does not have the infrastructure nor the financial resources to become the much larger state or flagship state school. BOth factors due to low and diminishing financial and related support from regent/legislative will. Both of former like to talk the game but are unwilling to fund it.
UM has adequate and competitive undergrad options for an institution its size and location. However it is in its graduate programs that it excells (in spite of the lack of funding) these probrams, Pharmacy, Business, Forestry, Journalism, and many related Bio-Med programs hold their own with both private and public institutions nationally and internationally.
Currently the total enrollment on UM/COT is just shy of 16K and I know from experience that current funding does not meet the needs of an academic institution. I am old enough to remember the '4 year degree' - well, the average UM student needs in the vincinity of 5 years now to get that 4 year degree. A lot due to lack of class access, instructors, lab facilities, tech access, etc....and it goes on. In short we cannot handle what we have currently. Sure more students mean more dollars but there are simply not the numbers of students available given MT and greater NW demographics.
I would prefer that UM sharpen its focus on what it has and somehow convince the policy makers across the state to bolster education with more investment.
That is exactly my point..The State of Montana has developed UM to the max physically, and now it has to be maintained and improved upon. The physical size, the funding mechanism, and the state elegibility standards are in play. My point about Montana Tech, ONCE a leader in some select fields, has been allowed to languish when in fact, it is probably THE most overlooked asset in the entire state that could improve not only the economic picture of a depressed SW Montana but the entire place. It has the land, the history, the recognition to actually achieve near instant results. But, to expand such a backwater college into major player takes money and will. But, any above average engineering or tech school with high entrance standards, offering up to date facilities and faculty will attract people from everywhere. USC and Stanford are excellent examples of what happens when a dedicated group decide to make their universities GREAT, not just good. Foreign students bring money, jobs, and new ideas and many stay so we all benefit. UM simply does not have the necessities for that...they have to built from the ground up while dealing with the present...education is the future. Last year, I took a trip to India and China and visited 4 polytech "universities"...no reason Montana could not do that..but, of course, I'm just another liberal wanting to tax and spend....another bonus would be an additional FCS team down the road...first11 said:
I agree that the world needs doctors. If we want to live in a society that has laws, courts, government, commerce, and all of the other institutions that some of us have apparently come to take for granted, then I think we need lawyers, too. Agreed?GrizLA said:
If you'd like to debate whether UM Law School contributes more or less to the overall welfare of the state of Montana than a state med school would, that's a discussion I'd be happy to have. Just say the word...
Tokyogriz
Well-known member
UM owns a considerable chunk of land around the campus, has the golf area, some spaces by big sky as well. There is plenty of room to expand and saying its maxed out is simply untrue. The school itself will grow as Montana grows in the future which long term it most likely will.
UM needs more out of state undergrads. They are $$$ in the bank period.
Undergraduate and graduate programs attract different types of money. $60 million in a grant form from graduate work doesnt directly translate into $60 million pumped into the local economy. But I would say $60 million in extra out of state tuition spent at UM would directly affect the Missoula area economy in a much bigger way.
Tech over at Butte is a renowned mining school for sure but I dont see that school doing much for Butte Montana. I would take 30,000 students tuition, and the huge boost they would give the Missoula and Western Montana economy over a selective small school anyday.
That said I very much believe strong post grad programs are key to a school for sure. But the financial base of the school is built on undergrad tuition. It keeps the lights on and has a much larger impact on the local economy.
UM needs more out of state undergrads. They are $$$ in the bank period.
Undergraduate and graduate programs attract different types of money. $60 million in a grant form from graduate work doesnt directly translate into $60 million pumped into the local economy. But I would say $60 million in extra out of state tuition spent at UM would directly affect the Missoula area economy in a much bigger way.
Tech over at Butte is a renowned mining school for sure but I dont see that school doing much for Butte Montana. I would take 30,000 students tuition, and the huge boost they would give the Missoula and Western Montana economy over a selective small school anyday.
That said I very much believe strong post grad programs are key to a school for sure. But the financial base of the school is built on undergrad tuition. It keeps the lights on and has a much larger impact on the local economy.
Tokyogriz
Well-known member
I know for a fact they own many houses around UM. The space between 5th and 6th is mostly owned if not all by them. I used to live in one of their houses on 5th right next to the international house.
The school has been buying up houses around the school over many years and rents them out at the moment. When the time comes they will be able to take out these houses and build. I dont have full data at the monent on how many houses but there are quite a few. It would be alot easier to pay off folks when you own a good chunk of houses on the block already when demolition time comes.
Go to the UM maintence office and check out their housing stock. Inside the office there is a gal who runs the UM rental properties that surround the school.
The school has been buying up houses around the school over many years and rents them out at the moment. When the time comes they will be able to take out these houses and build. I dont have full data at the monent on how many houses but there are quite a few. It would be alot easier to pay off folks when you own a good chunk of houses on the block already when demolition time comes.
Go to the UM maintence office and check out their housing stock. Inside the office there is a gal who runs the UM rental properties that surround the school.
