The all-inclusive Rutgers dumpster fire thread...

[atom58]

The real education - life - is what was called "the school of hard knocks" in NYC. The long suffering folks over in Piscataway, NJ will know all about that - on the athletic side anyway.

 

[Townie72]

At the least, the opportunity is there to get a real education.

I think the earlier post was talking about the value of things we learn and on experiences. You seem to be saying that if something is taught in a classroom as part of a curriculum than in has more value than experiences.

Much of what students are exposed to in college is not all that valuable. Especially in some of the "soft" majors. What Plato and Aristotle thought has had no value to me whatsoever.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

I would hope that a booster who has the resources to finance a trip for the football team would also contribute handsomely to academic programs at Ann Arbor. If not, shame on him or her.

I would hope that people would not pay attention to how other people spend their money, given that it's none of their business.

 

[Moontan]

Monmouth?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! O. M. G.!!!!! :rolling:

Good to see that King Rice is doing well.
I lived in the Binghamton area during his last 3 years of high school and his first 3 years at UNCHeat.

Great to see the 15-18 Scarlettes get the respect that they deserve.

 

[Toga]

School that shouldn’t be in Big Ten upset about life in Big Ten

 

[longtimefan]

I would hope that people would not pay attention to how other people spend their money, given that it's none of their business.

Doesn't mean that I can't have an opinion on it. Lots of things aren't my business, or yours. But, I hope we wouldn't play the 3 monkeys and ignore the world going on around us.

 

[orange79]

School that shouldn’t be in Big Ten upset about life in Big Ten

Politi's a good writer - I like his stuff. But this was a swing and a miss. The only highway robbery that exists here is Rutgers taking any money at all from the B1G. Politi has to know (right????) that if Rutgers (and MD for that matter) hadn't agreed to the tapered revenue payments, they wouldn't have been allowed in.

 

[HtownOrange]

School that shouldn’t be in Big Ten upset about life in Big Ten

And people wonder why Rutgers gets no respect. Rodney Dangerfield was a paragon of honor in comparison. Seriously, Rutgers not only gets the lifeline they and others desperately wanted, they get the proverbial golden ticket that gives them more money than they would have seen under the AAC and guaranteed a full share in a few more years and they still complain.

Many B1G schools and their respective fans are having serious buyers remorse. Is it any wonder why B1G fans read this thread and have their own Rutgers-dumpster fire threads on their fan sites?

 

[CuseLegacy]

 

[atom58]

School that shouldn’t be in Big Ten upset about life in Big Ten

Interesting article - makes you feel sorry for Rutgers in the short run anyway. The "buy-in" period b4 you get full $$ (6 years??) is a shenanigan the Big 12 did to WVU too but for only 3 or 4 years I think. I read somewhere the Big 10 also includes ticket sales as part of conference revenue to jack up their numbers. The ACC does not do that and you guys and Pitt got a full share of $$ from year one. This means the quoted conference revenue numbers are NOT directly comparable! Meanwhile the SEC (which the Big 10 would look down their noses at) is beating the Big 10 in revenue and the ESPN SEC channel is a big factor there. I can only hope the ESPN ACC channel will do something almost as good for us. We take a hit every 3 years when the Orange Bowl is in the CFP but the schools told the conference they wanted whatever was paid in a year as opposed to a 3 year average when asked about this I read. This past year (2016-17) will be a good one with average payouts of about $30 million and next year should be as good or better. When the Orange Bowl is part of the CFP again that will happen in the 1st year of the ACC network which is when the ACC schools will really begin to hit the jackpot.

 

[HtownOrange]

Interesting article - makes you feel sorry for Rutgers in the short run anyway. The "buy-in" period b4 you get full $$ (6 years??) is a shenanigan the Big 12 did to WVU too but for only 3 or 4 years I think. I read somewhere the Big 10 also includes ticket sales as part of conference revenue to jack up their numbers. The ACC does not do that and you guys and Pitt got a full share of $$ from year one. This means the quoted conference revenue numbers are NOT directly comparable! Meanwhile the SEC (which the Big 10 would look down their noses at) is beating the Big 10 in revenue and the ESPN SEC channel is a big factor there. I can only hope the ESPN ACC channel will do something almost as good for us. We take a hit every 3 years when the Orange Bowl is in the CFP but the schools told the conference they wanted whatever was paid in a year as opposed to a 3 year average when asked about this I read. This past year (2016-17) will be a good one with average payouts of about $30 million and next year should be as good or better. When the Orange Bowl is part of the CFP again that will happen in the 1st year of the ACC network which is when the ACC schools will really begin to hit the jackpot.

You are correct about the B1G buy in, in their defense, the buy in is for an equal share of the BTN, a tangible business. The Big 12 simply got a good deal from a desperate team.

You are also correct regarding the B1G revenue sharing. A portion of the gate goes to the payout pool and each school gets an equal share out, though the big dogs pay more in than they get out. Thus, Michigan, tOSU, PedState and UNL are net losers if one only looks at the gate revenues paid in and net out. However, the equal share is no different than buying a few body bag games, so there is a real benefit to the big dogs.

You are spot on when you say the deals are not directly comparable. There are way too many variables for a simple comparison to be made. I add two points to your analysis: 1) TV has far more money to play with, expect all P5 conferences to continue to get increases; and, 2) The B1G is in a stagnant population region wherein their market growth will fall behind the ACC and SEC, thus, the ACC and SEC could surpass the B1G in the not to distant future.

 

[orange79]

Interesting article - makes you feel sorry for Rutgers in the short run anyway. The "buy-in" period b4 you get full $$ (6 years??) is a shenanigan the Big 12 did to WVU too but for only 3 or 4 years I think. I read somewhere the Big 10 also includes ticket sales as part of conference revenue to jack up their numbers. The ACC does not do that and you guys and Pitt got a full share of $$ from year one. This means the quoted conference revenue numbers are NOT directly comparable! Meanwhile the SEC (which the Big 10 would look down their noses at) is beating the Big 10 in revenue and the ESPN SEC channel is a big factor there. I can only hope the ESPN ACC channel will do something almost as good for us. We take a hit every 3 years when the Orange Bowl is in the CFP but the schools told the conference they wanted whatever was paid in a year as opposed to a 3 year average when asked about this I read. This past year (2016-17) will be a good one with average payouts of about $30 million and next year should be as good or better. When the Orange Bowl is part of the CFP again that will happen in the 1st year of the ACC network which is when the ACC schools will really begin to hit the jackpot.

You lost me with your first sentence.

 

[TheCusian]

Define "Education".

Much of what some people "study" in college is more like "entertainment".

C'mon man.

 

[OrangeDW]

You lost me with your first sentence.

They could lose to every good team they play 50-0 and their fans would still talk crap and act like they're a legit program...wait, that actually happened. Not even a hypothetical.

That fanbase makes it impossible to feel bad for them.

 

[Briancuse]

They could lose to every good team they play 50-0 and their fans would still talk crap and act like they're a legit program...wait, that actually happened. Not even a hypothetical.

That fanbase makes it impossible to feel bad for them.

But they went to the Texas Bowl back in 06.

 

[OrangeDW]

But they went to the Texas Bowl back in 06.

 

[longtimefan]

I think the earlier post was talking about the value of things we learn and on experiences. You seem to be saying that if something is taught in a classroom as part of a curriculum than in has more value than experiences.

Much of what students are exposed to in college is not all that valuable. Especially in some of the "soft" majors. What Plato and Aristotle thought has had no value to me whatsoever.

I think those guys had great effects on Western civilization and culture. So I'm sure that their work has affected you in ways that none of us could possibly calculate.

And, you didn't happen to mention Pythagoras, without whom architects, and even carpenters, would be lost.

 

[Townie72]

I think those guys had great effects on Western civilization and culture. So I'm sure that their work has affected you in ways that none of us could possibly calculate.

And, you didn't happen to mention Pythagoras, without whom architects, and even carpenters, would be lost.

I going to take a wild guess that half the courses I took as an undergraduate had almost no value. Or their value to me or anyone pales in comparison to other non-academic experiences I have had.

I can go into a Gothic cathedral and I do understand the various components and I understand how these cathedrals are different from one another based on when and where they will built. That knowledge, of course, will get you a coffee at Starbucks along with the $2.90 you have to cough up.

To quote, "If you want to get laid, go to college. If you want to get an education, go to a library."

 

[TheCusian]

I going to take a wild guess that half the courses I took as an undergraduate had almost no value. Or their value to me or anyone pales in comparison to other non-academic experiences I have had.

I can go into a Gothic cathedral and I do understand the various components and I understand how these cathedrals are different from one another based on when and where they will built. That knowledge, of course, will get you a coffee at Starbucks along with the $2.90 you have to cough up.

To quote, "If you want to get laid, go to college. If you want to get an education, go to a library."

Last I checked, you are able to select the majority of the classes you decide to take. I learned up on the hill, that false equivalencies are the meant to dissuade thinking. I'd suggest both college and a library card... as well as an internet connection.

 

[Townie72]

Last I checked, you are able to select the majority of the classes you decide to take. I learned up on the hill, that false equivalencies are the meant to dissuade thinking. I'd suggest both college and a library card... as well as an internet connection.

Ahhh, yes. Course selection as a way to avoid course filled with inconsequential nonsense that will have almost any value to you in life.. Of course there are still curriculums and graduation requirements.

Now this may be overly cynical, but I'm thinking the difficulty of the class, the reputation of the professor for easy grading and the time slots are all critical parts of course selection for many, if not most, undergraduates.

I'm not talking about those with "hard" majors like engineering, architecture, some business topics, computer science, biology, chemistry, etc.

But I have a lot of empathy for the parents who have just spent $200,000 on a Fine Arts, English Literature or Sociology degree and have been told that Junior now wants to go to Grad School because he cannot find a job.

 

[TheCusian]

Ahhh, yes. Course selection as a way to avoid course filled with inconsequential nonsense that will have almost any value to you in life.. Of course there are still curriculums and graduation requirements.

Now this may be overly cynical, but I'm thinking the difficulty of the class, the reputation of the professor for easy grading and the time slots are all critical parts of course selection for many, if not most, undergraduates.

I'm not talking about those with "hard" majors like engineering, architecture, some business topics, computer science, biology, chemistry, etc.

But I have a lot of empathy for the parents who have just spent $200,000 on a Fine Arts, English Literature or Sociology degree and have been told that Junior now wants to go to Grad School because he cannot find a job.

Well, sure. But kids can choose what they major in and choose most of their classes. And choose for extra library time. Some do, some don't.

The truth is that valuing an education based solely on how much you earn post-college is kind of a selective measurement.

I went to Syracuse VPA and got an illustration degree, don't make as much as a doctor or lawyer - but have a beautiful, smart, fun wife and two awesome boys. Loans all paid off 10 years ago. And happy as hell.

Success is subjective, I think.

 

[Finwad32]

Philosophy and Sociology classes, were among the most interesting and enjoyable classes I attended. To each their own though.

Although of no real monetary value in terms of which career/job I have/had, those classes re-shaped the way I thought about everything.

 

[Townie72]

Well, sure. But kids can choose what they major in and choose most of their classes. And choose for extra library time. Some do, some don't.

The truth is that valuing an education based solely on how much you earn post-college is kind of a selective measurement.

I went to Syracuse VPA and got an illustration degree, don't make as much as a doctor or lawyer - but have a beautiful, smart, fun wife and two awesome boys. Loans all paid off 10 years ago. And happy as hell.

Success is subjective, I think.

This offshoot of this thread started with a comparison of the value of "experience" vs. the value of formal education.

There are some on here that seem to feel that formal education is always better than experience. I, from many years of living, know that isn't true. (I was also an adjunct Prof for nine years.)

You seem to be suggesting that when we can't find any real value in some courses, all we need to do is use a different value system. That's true.

But in today's world, I don't think many would see it that way. Education is too expensive.

 

[Cheriehoop]

This offshoot of this thread started with a comparison of the value of "experience" vs. the value of formal education.

There are some on here that seem to feel that formal education is always better than experience. I, from many years of living, know that isn't true. (I was also an adjunct Prof for nine years.)

You seem to be suggesting that when we can't find any real value in some courses, all we need to do is use a different value system. That's true.

But in today's world, I don't think many would see it that way. Education is too expensive.

Many graduate degrees require just a bachelors and a good MCAT, LSAT etc but not any specific graduate degree. Teachers, lawyers, MBA seekers, architects etc don't require bachelors in a specific major for their undergraduate degree.

In fact there is some evidence that having a divergent undergraduate degree prepares a student better for entrance exams to obtain professional graduate degrees.

https://www.usnews.com/education/be...-students-should-avoid-prelaw-majors-some-say

In fact 25% of medical school students major in something other than biology, physical and social sciences. I bet some of those social science degrees, many would consider useless also yet they are included in the 75% number. Society just doesn't value education gathered straight from libraries and being informally educated. A bachelors is the basic requirement for many jobs today. I got married after my junior year in college and had a job but to even apply for many jobs required a bachelors degree. I finished my degree and immediately doubled my salary. I can guarantee you that I wasn't suddenly twice as smart but I earned my right by society to move up and be valued more by spending the time and money to complete my degree.

Being an educated person can of course be gained outside college. My father built and fixed cars, any car, while 3 of his high school graduate entrepreneur brothers were brilliant in their fields, having 5 lucrative patents between them plus owning a well known construction company. They had informal educations and in depth understanding in very specific areas. They could have been engineers but would never have been hired without a degree. My father though before he passed away, lamented that the new technology in cars was mandating future auto nuts to be computer oriented and have some type of formal training. He said he always could just listen to a car and know what was wrong , but now cars are computerized, dependent on codes etc needing more specialized outside education and specialized machines to read what he used to do just by ear.

I agree that alone many bachelors degrees aren't highly valued job and salary wise (your sociology, geography, anthropology etc degrees) but not having a bachelors shuts out so many future opportunities in today's world and is so much more difficult and time consuming to obtain after you have a family.

 

[TheCusian]

This offshoot of this thread started with a comparison of the value of "experience" vs. the value of formal education.

There are some on here that seem to feel that formal education is always better than experience. I, from many years of living, know that isn't true. (I was also an adjunct Prof for nine years.)

You seem to be suggesting that when we can't find any real value in some courses, all we need to do is use a different value system. That's true.

But in today's world, I don't think many would see it that way. Education is too expensive.

I don't choose to get caught up in the difference between formal and experience. You need some mix of those things.

Yep, I was contrasting your statements (labeling as inconsequential nonsense) with the idea that value is in the eye of the beholder. As an illustrator/designer much of the things I learned in college are highly applicable. But I know lots of illustrators that work and are very successful with no college degree at all.

You just paint with a broad brush. Thought I'd share a view outside of your opinion.

(The good news with this digression is that any Rutgers fan that reads the thread will be thrown off by the concept of education.)