Louisville - Mid Level Commuter School

[TKG]

ESPN The Magazine on the Louisville/Adidas scandal.

http://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/21710106/louisville-athletic-director-tom-jurich-leveraged-big-deals-build-university-sports-powerhouse-only-watch-burn-amid-charges-excess

[arnie]

ESPN The Magazine on the Louisville/Adidas scandal.

http://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/21710106/louisville-athletic-director-tom-jurich-leveraged-big-deals-build-university-sports-powerhouse-only-watch-burn-amid-charges-excess

Wow, just Wow and disgusting.

[75Crazie]

Louisville needs to send its new athletic administration to Chapel Hill for a year's worth of study to see how to really run a professional athletic program without running the risk of NCAA or federal sanctions.

[mgtr]

This whole mess is truly amazing. Everybody connected with this (at UL and Adidas, and maybe others) should be banned from NCAA activities for life. And it sounds as though Louisville city officials were not exactly blameless -- easy to spend taxpayer money. Sad affair.

[jimsumner]

Before the most recent round of expansion, the ACC had two consistent positions on the subject.

The first is that any new schools would be expected to be full members of the ACC.

The second is that any new school would fit the ACC's academic profile of top-tier private schools and/or nationally respected public research institutions.

Notre Dame blew up the first.

Louisville blew up the second.

There was no reason for either except sheer, unadulterated greed.

Reap what you sow.

[WiJoe]

Purely on basketball basis and because I like the school's bkb history, I would have liked to see Cincinnati instead of Louisville.

Agree with Jim.

It was a panic move, and that's what you get.

[KenTankerous]

Gosh.

I'm sorry

We are sorry.

This really, honestly, is not who we are! Rick Padidas is not from here, we are not like him, we will be better going forward.

Some of you have been here and know us as better than this, right?

right?

[BD80]

Before the most recent round of expansion, the ACC had two consistent positions on the subject.

The first is that any new schools would be expected to be full members of the ACC.

The second is that any new school would fit the ACC's academic profile of top-tier private schools and/or nationally respected public research institutions.

Notre Dame blew up the first.

Louisville blew up the second.

There was no reason for either except sheer, unadulterated greed.

Reap what you sow.


Actually, unc was already blowing up the conference's academic reputation beyond repair. If we keep unc, where is the moral high-ground?

[OldPhiKap]

Gosh.

I'm sorry

We are sorry.

This really, honestly, is not who we are! Rick Padidas is not from here, we are not like him, we will be better going forward.

Some of you have been here and know us as better than this, right?

right?

I know you are in L’ville, but aren’t you a Wildcat fan?

Forgot to add KT as a good example of a fan from a rival school that plays well here.

[MartyClark]

Gosh.

I'm sorry

We are sorry.

This really, honestly, is not who we are! Rick Padidas is not from here, we are not like him, we will be better going forward.

Some of you have been here and know us as better than this, right?

right?

I've been there twice. One of my good attorney friends in Denver moved from Louisville 30 years ago. He has kept his Louisville season tickets. I've been down to Louisville twice to see Duke play. My friend's son is a well known sportscaster in Louisville so I've had the opportunity to see and do some fun things.

I like Louisville, the city, a lot. I like the Louisville basketball fans who did not harass me (much) for wearing Duke gear.

I can't comment on the school's academic prowess. Probably better than the college I graduated from.

I really don't know what to make of Pitino. Great coach but, boy, he sure allowed a lot of bad things to happen on his watch.

I'm pulling for Padgett and Lousiville, except against Duke. Padgett seems like an interim hire. What do you think?

[TKG]

There was no reason for either except sheer, unadulterated greed. Reap what you sow.

7903

[hallcity]

Before the most recent round of expansion, the ACC had two consistent positions on the subject.

The first is that any new schools would be expected to be full members of the ACC.

The second is that any new school would fit the ACC's academic profile of top-tier private schools and/or nationally respected public research institutions.

Notre Dame blew up the first.

Louisville blew up the second.

There was no reason for either except sheer, unadulterated greed.

Reap what you sow.

There was also a big element of fear after Maryland left. I don't think it was justified but there was a lot of fear that the conference might get picked apart.

[jimsumner]

There was also a big element of fear after Maryland left. I don't think it was justified but there was a lot of fear that the conference might get picked apart.

Expansion? Sure.

But why Louisville?

[KenTankerous]

I know you are in L’ville, but aren’t you a Wildcat fan?

Forgot to add KT as a good example of a fan from a rival school that plays well here.

Aww, shucks, thanks for that.

FWIW, I was a Kentucky fan but kinda lost the luster when the faithful did what they did to Tubby. I actually died a little there and left college sports all together. Then I met a Duke girl who gave me "Leading with the Heart" and "Five Point Play". We went to a game at Cameron that winter, stayed at The WaDuke, met Jon Sheyer and his family and I've been a Duke fan ever since.

[KenTankerous]

I've been there twice. One of my good attorney friends in Denver moved from Louisville 30 years ago. He has kept his Louisville season tickets. I've been down to Louisville twice to see Duke play. My friend's son is a well known sportscaster in Louisville so I've had the opportunity to see and do some fun things.

I like Louisville, the city, a lot. I like the Louisville basketball fans who did not harass me (much) for wearing Duke gear.

I can't comment on the school's academic prowess. Probably better than the college I graduated from.

I really don't know what to make of Pitino. Great coach but, boy, he sure allowed a lot of bad things to happen on his watch.

I'm pulling for Padgett and Lousiville, except against Duke. Padgett seems like an interim hire. What do you think?

Padgett is safe, homegrown and inexpensive. Truth be told, Louisville is a public institution staring down the double-barrel of two $40million plus payouts to Padidus and Jukiddinme. He didn't lose to IU, if he doesn't get blown out by UK and makes the tourney, they'll keep him.

this year

[OldPhiKap]

Aww, shucks, thanks for that.

FWIW, I was a Kentucky fan but kinda lost the luster when the faithful did what they did to Tubby. I actually died a little there and left college sports all together. Then I met a Duke girl who gave me "Leading with the Heart" and "Five Point Play". We went to a game at Cameron that winter, stayed at The WaDuke, met Jon Sheyer and his family and I've been a Duke fan ever since.

I just sent you a feedback comment on this that should have had an exclamation point at the end, not a question mark.

Oops.

[devildeac]

Expansion? Sure.

But why Louisville?

Who would you have added, Jim? Uconvicts? Cincinnati? Georgetown? Villanova? No one at that time? Using the retroscope (instead of the colonoscope:o), UL does indeed look like a poor choice but I'm having difficulty figuring who would have been a good fit.

[sagegrouse]

Who would you have added, Jim? Uconvicts? Cincinnati? Georgetown? Villanova? No one at that time? Using the retroscope (instead of the colonoscope:o), UL does indeed look like a poor choice but I'm having difficulty figuring who would have been a good fit.

Football is king. and, if not, money talks. Louisville had the biggest and "baddest" athletic program available. If we wanted 14 teams and not Louisville, then the choices appear to be Cincy and UConn. Maybe Temple.

[luvdahops]

Football is king. and, if not, money talks. Louisville had the biggest and "baddest" athletic program available. If we wanted 14 teams and not Louisville, then the choices appear to be Cincy and UConn. Maybe Temple.

On that point specifically, I was at a holiday party with a Notre Dame alum who is pretty plugged in with the Administration and Development Office there. He said that their long-term strategic planning assumes that football revenue will be essentially gone in 20 years. Not zero, but a fraction of what it is today, due to safety issues, declining fan engagement, unsustainable TV contracts, etc. And this is ND we are talking about.

[ChillinDuke]

Who would you have added, Jim? Uconvicts? Cincinnati? Georgetown? Villanova? No one at that time? Using the retroscope (instead of the colonoscope:o), UL does indeed look like a poor choice but I'm having difficulty figuring who would have been a good fit.

At the time that round of Realignment was occurring, there were no clearly good options. I'm sure you remember the situation, but at the risk of repeating backdrop...

Georgetown and Villanova were never, ever, a consideration. No football at those schools. Period. The end.

UConn's TV footprint was negligible in terms of value-add to the conference (we had BC, Syracuse, Pitt, and even Duke gets eyeballs on TV in NY Metro). UConn doesn't carry much in Boston (neither does BC for that matter). And the oft-cited BC "blackball" may not have helped, if it really exists. And none of this even mentions that UConn stinks at football - really stinks. (In hindsight, bball is going through a rough transition right now as well.)

It really came down to Cincy vs L'Ville. Cincinnati was probably my first choice, but with hesitancy. Unfortunately, the bus is driven by $$$, there's no way around it. And Louisville was a better athletic school ($$$-wise), and so they won out.

It was a difficult decision at a time when many things were in flux, and (I believe) the ACC was nervous for its own survival. I believe this was before the Grant of Rights was signed. Maryland had just bolted, the SEC was looking at expansion, the B1G had a huge contract, Texas had its own TV network. People were scared Va Tech or even UNC may jump ship - truthful or not those were the rumblings. If one of those two teams left, the ACC would have been in a precarious position. So, Swofford shot first and asked questions later - at Louisville.

The decision looks poor now. But at the time the options were slim and none of them really good. Cincy maybe was a better fit, but that school may have done little to pacify any skittish football schools looking to "level up".

- Chillin

ETA - IMO (most of this is my opinion on matters which were reasonably opaque at the time), the ND deal and the Grant of Rights were the two cornerstone moments to solidify the ACC and pacify membership. L'Ville was secondary to those 1a and 1b moments.

[Henderson]

What is the relevance of labeling Louisville a "commuter school"?

[devildeac]

At the time that round of Realignment was occurring, there were no clearly good options. I'm sure you remember the situation, but at the risk of repeating backdrop...

Georgetown and Villanova were never, ever, a consideration. No football at those schools. Period. The end.

UConn's TV footprint was negligible in terms of value-add to the conference (we had BC, Syracuse, Pitt, and even Duke gets eyeballs on TV in NY Metro). UConn doesn't carry much in Boston (neither does BC for that matter). And the oft-cited BC "blackball" may not have helped, if it really exists. And none of this even mentions that UConn stinks at football - really stinks. (In hindsight, bball is going through a rough transition right now as well.)

It really came down to Cincy vs L'Ville. Cincinnati was probably my first choice, but with hesitancy. Unfortunately, the bus is driven by $$$, there's no way around it. And Louisville was a better athletic school ($$$-wise), and so they won out.

It was a difficult decision at a time when many things were in flux, and (I believe) the ACC was nervous for its own survival. I believe this was before the Grant of Rights was signed. Maryland had just bolted, the SEC was looking at expansion, the B1G had a huge contract, Texas had its own TV network. People were scared Va Tech or even UNC may jump ship - truthful or not those were the rumblings. If one of those two teams left, the ACC would have been in a precarious position. So, Swofford shot first and asked questions later - at Louisville.

The decision looks poor now. But at the time the options were slim and none of them really good. Cincy maybe was a better fit, but that school may have done little to pacify any skittish football schools looking to "level up".

- Chillin

ETA - IMO (most of this is my opinion on matters which were reasonably opaque at the time), the ND deal and the Grant of Rights were the two cornerstone moments to solidify the ACC and pacify membership. L'Ville was secondary to those 1a and 1b moments.

Thanks! Pretty much as I remember it with some good additional opinions/ info/insight.

[jimsumner]

Who would you have added, Jim? Uconvicts? Cincinnati? Georgetown? Villanova? No one at that time? Using the retroscope (instead of the colonoscope:o), UL does indeed look like a poor choice but I'm having difficulty figuring who would have been a good fit.

I would have preferred Cincinnati, Temple, UConn, even West Virginia.

[sagegrouse]

Football is king. and, if not, money talks. Louisville had the biggest and "baddest" athletic program available. If we wanted 14 teams and not Louisville, then the choices appear to be Cincy and UConn. Maybe Temple.

Of course, I keep forgetting WVa, which has wanted to be in the ACC since 1953 and has been spurned many, many times.

[devildeac]

I would have preferred Cincinnati, Temple, UConn, even West Virginia.

Thanks. Each one makes some reasonable sense looking at their various strengths despite their apparent weaknesses.

[ChillinDuke]

I would have preferred Cincinnati, Temple, UConn, even West Virginia.

Was West Virginia definitely on the table? My notes (Wikipedia) say that WV joined the Big 12 on 10/25/12 while Louisville was voted into the ACC on 11/29/2012.

I guess it's likely that the ACC considered both teams on somewhat parallel time horizons. But at least based on the explicit sequencing, a deal with WV may have been "dead," leaving Cincy, Loovul, UConn, and Temple.

At the time, again as background, Temple was a very questionable choice. In 2004, Temple had been "expelled" (my notes) from the Big East due to lack of commitment to their football program. They played as an Independent in '05 and '06, then as a member of the MAC from '07-'11, before rejoining the Big East mostly in response to the Realignment which saw the Big East break off from the football-playing schools shortly thereafter, thus leaving Temple in the AAC.

So at that moment in time, Temple certainly felt like a "light" football school to add to the ACC. Having been expelled from a relatively weaker Big East conference due to a lack of commitment to the football program, playing in the MAC, and only rejoining the Big East when that (again weaker) conference was trying to save itself.

In other words, personal preferences aside, the only real contenders were most likely Cincy, Loovul, and UConn. And maybe West Virginia if you assume the wheels were in motion for a few months predating the Louisville announcement.

- Chillin

[BD80]

What is the relevance of labeling Louisville a "commuter school"?

The thread title was lifted from the article.

It is relevant in that the rise of Louisville as a sports power is even more amazing when considering where it was 20 years ago. UL became fully competitive across a spectrum of sports with programs having 50,000 + in enrollment.

[jimsumner]

Had the ACC indicated it had interest in West Virginia, I'm pretty sure they would have waited. This stuff just didn't happen overnight.

West Virginia and Virginia Tech were both considered for the ACC back in 1953 and both lobbied very hard for inclusion. But this was pre-interstate and accessibility concerns ruled both out.

West Virginia probably belongs in the Big 10 more than in the ACC. But both definitely trump their current home. I'm reasonably certain WVU would rather be playing UVa, Virginia Tech, the Big Four etc. than schools in Kansas and Oklahoma.

Had either Temple or even Villanova been accepted into the ACC, it would have been under the proviso that they sink lots of money into their football programs. Not sure either was/is so inclined.

There also was some discussion of the directional Florida schools, Central Florida and South Florida. Not sure how serious this was.

[BD80]

...

There also was some discussion of the directional Florida schools, Central Florida and South Florida. Not sure how serious this was.

A directional school in the ACC? That would certainly have hurt our academic reputation!

Oh wait, we already had north carolina ...

[sagegrouse]

There also was some discussion of the directional Florida schools, Central Florida and South Florida. Not sure how serious this was.

Jim, I am also assuming the existing schools have an informal veto over additions, in which case I don;t see Miami and FSU being receptive to USF or UCF. Moreover, that was one of the problems with UConn -- BC wanted to be the only New England school in the ACC

Quite frankly, the last conference perturbations were something of a gold rush, with the major conferences racing to get the available schools with wealthy athletic programs.

[ChillinDuke]

Had the ACC indicated it had interest in West Virginia, I'm pretty sure they would have waited. This stuff just didn't happen overnight.

West Virginia and Virginia Tech were both considered for the ACC back in 1953 and both lobbied very hard for inclusion. But this was pre-interstate and accessibility concerns ruled both out.

West Virginia probably belongs in the Big 10 more than in the ACC. But both definitely trump their current home. I'm reasonably certain WVU would rather be playing UVa, Virginia Tech, the Big Four etc. than schools in Kansas and Oklahoma.

Had either Temple or even Villanova been accepted into the ACC, it would have been under the proviso that they sink lots of money into their football programs. Not sure either was/is so inclined.

There also was some discussion of the directional Florida schools, Central Florida and South Florida. Not sure how serious this was.

Very interesting - thanks.

So you're still left with Louisville, Cincinnati, UConn, and West Virginia as your most likely candidates at that point in time. There are pros/cons to each. But frankly, Louisville is the clear leader (in my eyes) based on (1) football strength at that time, (2) locational accretion to the ACC's portfolio of TV jurisdictions, and (3) general sports strength. In that order of relevance.

Cincinnati maybe gave you some of (2). And a little bit of (1) - not much. (3) basketball I guess, but little else?

UConn gave you none of (1). And arguably very little of (2). End of story.

West Virginia gave you some of (1). Arguably little of (2). (3) basketball again, but little else?

Nova and Temple are no's to (1). Even with a proviso. End of story.

UCF/USF added some of (1). But arguably nothing to (2) since we have FSU and Miami.

Louisville just stood out among the other options based on the criteria.

Is there any way to swap out Louisville at this point, given what's happening there? Methinks we're stuck.

- Chillin

[Jeffrey]

"On Oct. 18, Jurich was fired by a 10-3 vote of the trustees."

Amazing that three trustees wanted to still keep Jurich!

[PackMan97]

Is there any way to swap out Louisville at this point, given what's happening there? Methinks we're stuck. - Chillin

Why get rid of Louisville and keep the other cheaters? To be honest, while what Louisville has done is definitely not cool....at least they haven't perverted their entire academic mission in order to keep atheltes eligible.

[johnb]

What is the relevance of labeling Louisville a "commuter school"?

Prior to expansion, ACC schools were either private or flagship state universities. Every school could claim a relatively long athletic tradition and were also one of the best universities in its state. It's fine for us to get snobby about it, but the reality that is most very smart high schoolers in the south go to the state flagship university. When we were getting to 14 schools, there weren't any flagship universities left. U Conn is the closest, but the demographics of high school matriculation are a bit different in the northeast, and lots of the smart/affluent CT kids go to private colleges (which--combined with less attention to college football in the NE--translates to less of a passionate following for football). This matters in that current and future business leaders in South Carolina, say, have often gone to Clemson (or South Carolina). Lots of smart and successful folks go to and have gone to Louisville, but KY is clearly the state's major franchise, both academically and financially. That isn't going to change anytime soon. Imho, Louisville was never a natural fit, but I assume the ACC administrators were far more concerned about losing FSU, Miami, UNC, and UVa to the SEC +/- the Big 10 than they were about maintaining the traditional ACC focus.

[duke79]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-12-13/college-basketball-made-louisville-then-broke-it

Good story today on Bloomberg about the "back story" at U of L. Truly disgusting and unbelievable.

[sagegrouse]

Prior to expansion, ACC schools were either private or flagship state universities. Every school could claim a relatively long athletic tradition and were also one of the best universities in its state. It's fine for us to get snobby about it, but the reality that is most very smart high schoolers in the south go to the state flagship university. When we were getting to 14 schools, there weren't any flagship universities left. U Conn is the closest, but the demographics of high school matriculation are a bit different in the northeast, and lots of the smart/affluent CT kids go to private colleges (which--combined with less attention to college football in the NE--translates to less of a passionate following for football). This matters in that current and future business leaders in South Carolina, say, have often gone to Clemson (or South Carolina). Lots of smart and successful folks go to and have gone to Louisville, but KY is clearly the state's major franchise, both academically and financially. That isn't going to change anytime soon. Imho, Louisville was never a natural fit, but I assume the ACC administrators were far more concerned about losing FSU, Miami, UNC, and UVa to the SEC +/- the Big 10 than they were about maintaining the traditional ACC focus.

Yeah, Louisville may be a "step down" in terms of local prestige, but Florida State was the the Florida State College for Women from 1909 to 1947, when returning vets after WW II led to male enrollments. Neither FSU or recent-addition Pitt are "flagship" state universities.

FWIW, it's worth, the ACC has five of 11 private universities in Power Five conferences (six of 12 if Notre Dame is counted):

BC
Syracuse
Wake
Duke
Miami

vs.

Vandy (SEC)
Northwestern (Big Ten)
TCU (Big 12)
Baylor (Big 12)
Stanford (Pac 12)
USC (Pac 12)

[johnb]

Yeah, Louisville may be a "step down" in terms of local prestige, but Florida State was the the Florida State College for Women from 1909 to 1947, when returning vets after WW II led to male enrollments. Neither FSU or recent-addition Pitt are "flagship" state universities.

FWIW, it's worth, the ACC has five of 11 private universities in Power Five conferences (six of 12 if Notre Dame is counted):

BC
Syracuse
Wake
Duke
Miami

vs.

Vandy (SEC)
Northwestern (Big Ten)
TCU (Big 12)
Baylor (Big 12)
Stanford (Pac 12)
USC (Pac 12)

To generalize, it's always tough to generalize.

The core ACC fits the flagship/private school paradigm.

By the time they joined, FSU and Pitt were Flagship Lite, with Florida and Penn State being more visible. FL and PA are big states, however, so maybe one could argue that there is room for 2 (as there are in places like Texas, Oklahoma, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Michigan). In those examples, there's a University of X that sees itself as preeminent, and which the other state's universities see as snobby, and then there's an X State, that may have emerged out of something more pragmatic, like teaching or agriculture, and their fans (and sometimes their students) often identify more with working class stuff (and which the University of X mocks for training people to be farmers).

I'm sure others on DBR know more about this than I do, but these demographic rivalries are a big deal. Traditional commuter schools, like Louisville, U of Houston, Seton Hall, or St. Johns often have a lot of alumni and may field good sports teams, but they have a lot of trouble getting enduring traction because they are simply different from places like NC State, Texas A & M, or Oklahoma State, which recruit a lot of smart, motivated undergrads and turn them into tens of thousands of alums who donate and wear the school colors on weekends.

On-campus bonding of large swaths of people who are likely to go on to be relatively involved in their local community and their college's academics and sports teams (not in that order) seems crucial, and I don't know if Louisville is likely to ever fulfill that mandate. The Bloomberg story goes into a lot more detail

The on-campus college experience is, of course, one of many middle class privileges that is often taken for granted, but I don't think that experience is likely to go away even in the world of online education. Kids and their parents are deeply motivated to separate, especially if there's a promise that it's fairly safe and likely to lead to a better career.

[jimsumner]

A lot of southern states used the Morrill Land-Grant Act to establish an agricultural university, which gradually morphed into an agricultural, engineering, design university. So, NC State, Virginia Tech, Clemson, Auburn and Mississippi State have a comparable relationship to UNC, UVa, South Carolina, Alabama and Ole Miss. The older, snootier school is liberal arts-social science-humanities, with a law school, a medical school and doctoral programs in history, English, et. al.

The Land-Grant Schools are considered more blue-collar, more egalitarian, more rural, but with really good engineering programs, advanced training in agriculture, maybe forestry or a vet school.

But they are well-regarded research universities in both cases.

Lots of over-generalizations here. But in the cases I've cited, the older university could be considered the Flagship school, the newer school Flagship2 or something like that.

But not every state went this way. Georgia, Florida and Kentucky just bundled existing universities into the MLG program.

And Louisville was a public municipal university before joining the state university system and I suspect there aren't many P5 analogs to that.

But it seems to me that Louisville is more analogous to FSU or East Carolina then it is to VT or NCSU.