SMU Professor Says Move To The Big East Will Hurt SMU, Like He Says It Hurt Rutgers
SMU professor Sanford Thatcher wrote this strongly worded column today arguing that the overemphasis on athletics and the move to the Big East will 1. Reduce the caliber of applicants to SMU 2. Divert giving from academic to athletic endeavors 3. Result in the dissolution of non-revenue sports in the name of protecting the few profitable sports on campus. The kicker? His argument is based on what he (and the book Confessions Of A Spoilsport) says happened to Rutgers when it made the move to the Big East in 1995.
(ht: Laken Litman for tweeting this article earlier today)
about 1 month ago
Mengus22
8 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Budding Rivalry
Rutgers/SMU heating up already…
by jmverlin on May 3, 2025 5:08 PM EDT reply actions
the book is a crock of shit
written by a proven liar and racist.
by On the Banks on May 3, 2025 5:27 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
For the Record
We’re not endorsing his opinion. Just posted it because he used another Big East team as his example. You’re welcome to rebut here or on On The Banks and we’d be happy to link to it.
by Mengus22 on May 3, 2025 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions
He is not a professor at SMU. He is some sort of visiting administrator with no long term ties to SMU or knowledge of the school’s history.
by Digetydog on May 4, 2025 4:39 PM EDT reply actions
I won't comment on SMU
because in case no one back east is paying attention, Boise State is in a world of hurt of its own. With the FB only invite we have been trying to find a home for our other sports. The MWC won’t let us keep them in that conference, the WCC is a religious-only conference, the Big West is a California based bus conference, so we rejoined the WAC. Now that conference is almost gone as the MWC and CUSA have expanded to replace the teams taken by the Big East. Our options are severely limited.
Teamwork is what the Green Bay Packers were all about. They didn't do it for individual glory. They did it because they loved one another.---Vince Lombardi
by bluesyourdaddy on May 4, 2025 7:09 PM EDT reply actions
This "professor"
makes assumptions and assertions without any objective-based quantitative facts to back them up which is what he needs. For instance, the professor should compare the USNAWR rankings of Rutgers from 95’ to now. I don’t know what it is for Rutgers, but in Pitt’s case, I can say with 100% confidence that it has climbed considerably since 95’, and Pitt puts a-lot of emphasis on their football program. Rutgers and Pitt today are both top 60 in the USNWR rankings, so they are both doing fine academically.
by PittGuy on May 4, 2025 9:00 PM EDT reply actions
LOL
Considering how historically bad Rutgers was in football before recent years, I don’t see how it’s possible for them to be worse off now than before joining the Big East.
And considering where SMU’s been, I don’t see how the Big East could be bad for them, either.
Okay, somebody in the Big East has made this necessary. "BC" in my nickname references the icon. I AM NOT A BOSTON COLLEGE FAN.
by VoiceOfBC on May 7, 2025 8:03 AM EDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
- Start posting on Big East Coast Bias
- Follow @becb_sbn
- Follow Big East Coast Bias on your Android Device!
- Subscribe to Big East Coast Bias Stories
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
