Jump to content

Mizzou athletics struggling financially

texifornia

By texifornia
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

NIUHuskies

NIUHuskies 505

Posted
Posted

Also, Missouri's big cities aren't expanding? This demographic loss coupled with rural negative population growth could explain why the enrollment is down. Also, dirty little secret is that athletic departments tack on a student fee for athletics. So less students equals less money coming in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ImissWallyPryor

ImissWallyPryor 9046

Posted
Posted
Just now, NIUHuskies said:

Also, Missouri's big cities aren't expanding? This demographic loss coupled with rural negative population growth could explain why the enrollment is down. Also, dirty little secret is that athletic departments tack on a student fee for athletics. So less students equals less money coming in.

fewer

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ButtFumble

ButtFumble 5297

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, ImissWallyPryor said:

I don’t recall The Big 10 Decision article saying anything about MU blowing their chance by leaking the B1G’s plans. I do recall it tipping off NU, but I thought by then MU was not a serious candidate. I was a good article, nonetheless.  

you are correct the article did not say that at all

that is my take on how all the things played out and it is really just me suspecting that is what happened

that particular article was very good and informative (especially dealing with Texas not being to blame AT ALL), but that article did not mention any other candidates

but it was well known that MU wanted in the Big 10 for a long time and that article made it clear that Nebraska was not looking to leave the Big 12

really I am just putting pieces together as to why MU was never really a PUBLICLY serious candidate.....it is well known from other articles that Nebraska had over a decade of warning their AAU membership was in jeopardy so that was of no surprise to any Big 10 members or the Big 10 conference.....but yet they still moved very rapidly to go ahead and add Nebraska even though it was well known by all Big 10 members that a vote was coming on AAU membership in the very near future and it was well known (and documented now) that some Big 10 members did not want Nebraska because of that and at least 2 of them voted to boot Nebraska

Missouri was and still is in the AAU.....Missouri is much less shitty at athletics than Rutgers or Maryland, but Rutgers and Maryland were added

it was well known that the Big 10 had interest in UNC, Duke, GaTech, Virginia and possibly NC State (NC State not being in the AAU though)

I would imagine there was some hesitation with UNC and Duke to leave NC State behind

in my opinion when you break it all down it was known the Big 10 was looking to expand, it was known they wanted some ACC members and it was known that MU wanted in badly and it has been made clear now that NU was clueless and sitting on their ass and they were looking at being booted from the AAU

and of course now we know that after all the "big moves" by the Big 10 they ended up with Nebraska that was booted from the AAU, Rutgers that is the shittiest D1-A athletics program BY FAR, and Maryland that is pretty shitty as well (and shittier than MU)

there is ZERO chance that was the plan in the days prior to Nebraska learning that conference realignment was about to happen and leave them behind possibly

the fact that the Big 10 moved rapidly to get Nebraska even before doing anything with any ACC members tells me they were interested in a team from the Big 12 or in the Big 12 footprint and they knew they were probably not going to get 5 teams from the ACC (at least right off)

I would imagine their plan was add MU and at least 2 (UVA and GT) if not 4 teams (UVA GT, UNC, Duke) from the ACC and then sit back and watch what happened from there so they would be at 14 or 16 and knowing that CU was gone from the Big 12 no matter what

that leaves Clemson, FSU and Miami in the ACC down 2 or 4 teams and NC State and Pitt there was well

if they cannot grab Texas and ND because they think those two are finally looking to jump then they grab Pitt and NC State to 18 and then the Big 12 grabs at least two from Clemson, FSU, Miami, and WVU to get to 12 or all 4 to get to 14

you have 18 in the Big 10, 12 or 14 in the Big 12, 12 in the PAC 12 and 12 in the SEC SEC SEC unless the SEC SEC SEC decides they wanted WVU and Miami to go to 14 and then the Big 12  stays at 12

 

my thinking is that it was 100% known the Big 10 was going to do something, it is 100% known they were not talking to Nebraska at all and Nebraska was clueless anything was happening, it is 100% known MU wanted in the Big 10

and I cannot see a chance in hell that all of the sudden the plans for the Big 10 that they had been working on for YEARS dramatically changed when NU all of the sudden came to talk to them and instead of strictly being interested in at least 5 members of the ACC that were highly desirable (and willing to WAIT THAT OUT) they all the sudden scrapped that and made a bunch of last second decisions to add Nebraska that was also getting booted from the AAU and then sat back and watched everything else fall apart around them only to end up at 14 (a shitty number) including Rutgers and Maryland

I think they had a plan to make the Big 12 act (knowing the PAC 12 would ask CU for sure and CU would go no matter what) and to force the hand of some in the ACC to act as well.....but before they could line up the ACC teams word got out and the ACC teams they wanted panicked and all of the sudden ND dropped in the laps of the ACC as well

the plan was to pick apart the ACC with the help of others, but they had to move things int he right way and that meant forcing the Big 12 AND members of the ACC to act

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bullneck

Bullneck 19622

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Helobious said:

That’s cool. Let me know when people fill stadiums by the tens of thousands to watch non-professionals play those sports.

Some people see something as a lifetime participation activity.

Some people see something as a lifetime spectator activity.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Randolph Duke

Randolph Duke 4034

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Helobious said:

Unpopular opinion: it’s absurd colleges give out scholarships to anything other than football and men’s basketball. No other sport generates enough interest (at the college level at least) to warrant scholarships. Cut the scholarships to other sports, trim down the coaching staffs, save a bunch of money. “But what about the future soccer/swimming/tennis/golf etc. athletes”... we warn kids all the time not to pick a dumb major. We should also start warning them not to pick a dumb sport.

Title IX kind of complicated your plan to only give 100 men’s scholarships. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beau Vine

Beau Vine 55904

Posted
Posted
Unpopular opinion: it’s absurd colleges give out scholarships to anything other than football and men’s basketball. No other sport generates enough interest (at the college level at least) to warrant scholarships. Cut the scholarships to other sports, trim down the coaching staffs, save a bunch of money. “But what about the future soccer/swimming/tennis/golf etc. athletes”... we warn kids all the time not to pick a dumb major. We should also start warning them not to pick a dumb sport.
Unpopular and idiotic. Lots of baseball, hockey, and women's bball programs bring in tons of money
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DFW Horn

DFW Horn 6679

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

This is absolutely correct. Well I actually wish conferences were regional for everything, but that's obviously never gonna happen in the big sports.

But it's absolutely stupid that West Virginia's women's tennis team has to fly to Austin for a conference match.

Hell, that's a vacation for those hillbillies. I'm sure they've embraced it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beau Vine

Beau Vine 55904

Posted
Posted
conferences should only exist for football and men's basketball. all other sports should be in a regional conference. that would drastically cut back on travel expenses. 
Preach!
It's fucking insane that the soccer girl in my class had to miss classes to fly to fucking Boone NC for a game that 200 people attended. An AD told me that trip cost the university $40k.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beau Vine

Beau Vine 55904

Posted
Posted
Also, Missouri's big cities aren't expanding? This demographic loss coupled with rural negative population growth could explain why the enrollment is down. Also, dirty little secret is that athletic departments tack on a student fee for athletics. So less students equals less money coming in.
Iirc, MoSt and UmKC were gaining enrollment, though.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Johnny Sack

Johnny Sack 8397

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, Helobious said:

Unpopular opinion: it’s absurd colleges give out scholarships to anything other than football and men’s basketball. No other sport generates enough interest (at the college level at least) to warrant scholarships. Cut the scholarships to other sports, trim down the coaching staffs, save a bunch of money. “But what about the future soccer/swimming/tennis/golf etc. athletes”... we warn kids all the time not to pick a dumb major. We should also start warning them not to pick a dumb sport.

I would cut expenses in other ways first before cutting scholarships.

Namely, outside of football and maybe basketball, it is stupid to have conferences that cover vast geographic areas.  Texas does not need to be sending its baseball team, women and Olympic sports to West Virginia or Kansas to compete.  Nonrevenue sports just should not be in the same conference as football and basketball.  They should be in geographically small regional conferences where travel can be done by bus.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Johnny Sack

Johnny Sack 8397

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

conferences should only exist for football and men's basketball. all other sports should be in a regional conference. that would drastically cut back on travel expenses. 

Well shit, you posted 14 hours ago what I just posted.  Guess I should read the thread all the way through.  Agree 100%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TornACL

TornACL 7805

Posted
Posted

Mizzou sucks and has always sucked.

Their public flirting with the Big 10 brought the conference down. They're the luckiest sons of bitches on earth that the SEC needed an even number of teams.

Mizzou is like the piece of shit 7 dollar clearance shirt you order online in order to get free shipping on the shit you actually want.

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SwanderedTalent

SwanderedTalent 5761

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

Well I actually wish conferences were regional for everything,

this is correct

Whether people understand it or not, college football was more compelling when it was more highly regional. It should not be EXCLUSIVELY regional, and its champion should not be determined in a way that's artificially constrained by regional alignment (e.g., Texas goes to the Cotton Bowl and Nebraska to the Orange Bowl and there's no follow-on playoff round), but the idea that CFB is improved by having Texas play in the ACC or the Big Ten West or in an actual conference with USC, LSU, and Ohio State is completely wrong.

I can't expound without going into realignment shit, but the psychology of it is evident in how fans are less engaged now than they were 40 years ago. It's not just flat screen TVs and 5G phones. We pretty much have the worst possible midpoint between "win all your games and win the Cotton Bowl" and "the NFL model" right now.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mr.goodkat

mr.goodkat 469

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

I would cut expenses in other ways first before cutting scholarships.

Namely, outside of football and maybe basketball, it is stupid to have conferences that cover vast geographic areas.  Texas does not need to be sending its baseball team, women and Olympic sports to West Virginia or Kansas to compete.  Nonrevenue sports just should not be in the same conference as football and basketball.  They should be in geographically small regional conferences where travel can be done by bus.

 

fuck that . i like seeing Texas playing Stanford, LSU , Cal-state . 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vic Mackey

Vic Mackey 48063

Posted
Posted
16 hours ago, Helobious said:

Unpopular opinion: it’s absurd colleges give out scholarships to anything other than football and men’s basketball. No other sport generates enough interest (at the college level at least) to warrant scholarships. Cut the scholarships to other sports, trim down the coaching staffs, save a bunch of money. “But what about the future soccer/swimming/tennis/golf etc. athletes”... we warn kids all the time not to pick a dumb major. We should also start warning them not to pick a dumb sport.

You are going to hurt people's feelings who bitch and moan that the golf and rowing team are just as important as football and basketball and how they should be valued and celebrated just the same. Other than football and basketball, every other sport is niche sports in college. That get very little attention or support and are pretty much sustained from the revenue from the 2 big sports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ShaggyBevo RIP

ShaggyBevo RIP 3873

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Beau Vine said:

Preach!
It's fucking insane that the soccer girl in my class had to miss classes to fly to fucking Boone NC for a game that 200 people attended. An AD told me that trip cost the university $40k.

That's on SWT for joining the Sun Belt. You're the WVU head scratcher for that conference.  Y'all are going to really love it when your turn comes around for a late November game in Boone and it is snowing with the wind chill around 0 degrees. 

Edited by ShaggyBevo RIP
Link to comment
Share on other sites
'stache

'stache 22163

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Vic Mackey said:

You are going to hurt people's feelings who bitch and moan that the golf and rowing team are just as important as football and basketball and how they should be valued and celebrated just the same. Other than football and basketball, every other sport is niche sports in college. That get very little attention or support and are pretty much sustained from the revenue from the 2 big sports.

College sports were not intended to be profitable. They were part of a schools offering and culture, like for most high schools and the Ivy League. The extreme profitability of college football and basketball is a relatively recent phenomenon. "Amateur" sports should not be expected to make money, and nobody anywhere is suggesting that rowing should be as popular as football. But it all feeds into the fact that, in my opinion, college football and men's basketball players need to be reconfigured into something else other than "amateur" college athletics. The players deserve a piece of the extreme revenues they generate. The same argument doesn't exist for other sports where scholarships are a good way to encourage athletics and school culture. Those sports also don't have coaching making $5 million and aren't doing multi-million dollar stadium renovations every five years just to keep up. If it costs more than it brings in, that's fine (keeping in mind that scholarships aren't really a "cost" being paid out, the real costs are coaches and facilities, and the olympic sports aren't paying $2.5 mil for assistant coaches like SEC football). 

Edited by 'stache
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
texaslong

texaslong 678

Posted
Posted

“We don’t know (the figure) yet. The conference is still settling up all the bowl games,” said Tim Hickman, MU’s deputy athletics directory and chief financial officer. “But it’ll be on the higher end of that (projection) because we had a good year with three teams in the New Year’s Six bowls.”

 

They really are just like A&M. Sucking on the Bama, LSU, and Georgia tit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Randolph Duke

Randolph Duke 4034

Posted
Posted
20 hours ago, Steel Shank said:

The state of Texas would have a kickass baseball conference if we went the regional conference route for "non-revenue" sports.

 

The “one conference for all sports” structure needs to die and each sport develop a conference affiliation structure that works best for that sport. 

Football works better on a model where teams with similar economic resources are matched against each other. Olympic sports work better on geographic affiliations.

There is no reason all teams from a given school have to be in one conference for all sports. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
texifornia

texifornia 59107

Posted
  • Author
Posted
5 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Missery has never sniffed AAU. B1G sees no market value nor academic value. SEC, imo, took them as a package deal to "get into Texas" unaware that BCS is not part of Texas rather an Island of Freaks and Weirdos that noone can understand from the outside.

Why don't you take a look at the school in between Minnesota and North Carolina: https://www.aau.edu/who-we-are/our-members

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JWinTX

JWinTX 53

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Yep. And NU only got in because they WERE, past tense AAU. NU isn't anymore because Texas, yes, the one Korn always bitches about, kept pushing to keep them was the ONLY reason they were. They left the Big XII, Texas said fuck'em and the B1G voted unanimously to kick them from AAU.

Missery has never sniffed AAU. B1G sees no market value nor academic value. SEC, imo, took them as a package deal to "get into Texas" unaware that BCS is not part of Texas rather an Island of Freaks and Weirdos that noone can understand from the outside.

Missouri has been an AAU institution since 1908.

Kansas is the school that will, ironically, fit their AAU model, as well as give them a decent TV market, and help with hoops. It would be rather funny to see Missouri, who had to watch Nebraska steal their coveted B1G spot, then watch Kansas go there, too, when the Big XII GOR expires.

Edited by JWinTX
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jhawk

Jhawk 1075

Posted
Posted

Here’s the thing about Missouri...

it’s the people. They’re terrible. Everyone in Missouri is only looking out for themselves. Especially STL and Columbia. They are always scheming to get a win and make sure the other team loses in all aspects of life. I’ve done 3 real estate deals in MO and in each of them the people on the other side are so intent on a win/lose outcome that it ALWAYS bites them in the ass.

Further, they have no loyalty. They will ride someone’s coattails all the way to the finish line and then act like they were the ones who won the race. Give no credit to anyone that probably did more to get them there than they did themselves. this creates a unique problem. MU fans leave MU (if the even ever graduated high school) and they NEVER give back or support the school financially. The well known pitch on why KU went to the orange bowl and MU didn’t was because our AD showed the MU record when travel was required for a game. MU grads leave the school and instantly believe that they would be successful (if they are) regardless of their education. They don’t think MU did anything for them. 
 

So of course this attitude permitted the decision making of the school. They leave the big 12 because the conference has never done anything for them. They don’t budget they don’t look at logistics, they just look at a paycheck that is so far away they don’t realize they will be so set back in their cash flow for 3-4 years that they can’t recover. 
 

MU makes bad decisions because their drive by alumni base pines for it because they are so self centered and arrogant that they can’t see past their own nose. The glory in all of this is the attitude of the alum has turned to “well the school made a bad decision, why should I support them?” Which only compounds the problem. I’m hopeful the whole system has to shut down. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beau Vine

Beau Vine 55904

Posted
Posted
The “one conference for all sports” structure needs to die and each sport develop a conference affiliation structure that works best for that sport. 
Football works better on a model where teams with similar economic resources are matched against each other. Olympic sports work better on geographic affiliations.
There is no reason all teams from a given school have to be in one conference for all sports. 
TV contracts are what cause/fuck this all up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ImissWallyPryor

ImissWallyPryor 9046

Posted
Posted
On 1/31/2020 at 9:36 AM, BurntEyes said:

Yep. And NU only got in because they WERE, past tense AAU. NU isn't anymore because Texas, yes, the one Korn always bitches about, kept pushing to keep them was the ONLY reason they were. They left the Big XII, Texas said fuck'em and the B1G voted unanimously to kick them from AAU. Which is ironic because some Korn claimed that's why they wanted to go knowing full well it was really because they were Texas bitch in all things academic and sports.

Missery has never sniffed AAU. B1G sees no market value nor academic value. SEC, imo, took them as a package deal to "get into Texas" unaware that BCS is not part of Texas rather an Island of Freaks and Weirdos that noone can understand from the outside.

Actually, Texas fought to keep them in the AAU to the bitter end. Perhaps Texas didn’t fight quite as hard, but Texas was NU’s most powerful supporter. Perlman has said as much. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ButtFumble

ButtFumble 5297

Posted
Posted
Just now, texifornia said:

So did Nebraska just get bounced because of the med school thing?

.no that was one of two excuses NU tried to use

but the AAU made it clear that was nonsense for several reasons

1. there are a number of members in the AAU that do not have a medical school including Rice, Texas (at the time before Dell was started), and aggy before aggy had merged all of their medical components under the main campus

2. NU had about a decade of warnings that they were in danger of being booted and they could have merged their stand alone medical school if that would have made a difference and I doubt the City of Omaha or NU-Omaha had the power to stop that merger if it mattered

3. the most important reason and why the merger never happened.....the AAU does not simply compare universities to each other they break them down into various groups

private universities, public universities, universities with a medical school, universities without medical schools, universities in states that have a large number of public universities (like Texas, Ohio, and California) and universities in states with very few public universities (like Kansas and Nebraska)

then they compare universities in those groups as well....the medical school in the NU System is not really a research powerhouse and I do not think it has a number of highly recognized faculty on staff and that is not to knock on it that is just the reality.....so merging that medical school into the main university really would not have boosted the metrics especially when NU went from being compared to similar universities without a medical school to ones with a medical school

 

NU also claimed that it was unfair that the AAU excluded some agricultural research....mainly research that is statutorily awarded for being a land grant university instead of being competitively awarded

the AAU does exclude some research especially statutorily awarded land grant research and they give more weight to life science research and some other types over other types and for all of it they really look at competitively awarded research (vs state funded research or university funded research or private research that was funded without any grant process open to many schools)

again this was just a smoke screen because many members of the AAU are land grant schools including the vast majority of the Big 10 (UM, Indiana, Northwestern, and Iowa are the 4 that are not).....so 10 out of 14 members of the Big 10 are also land grant schools and 100% of them along with all of the other non-Big 10 land grant schools in the AAU have their statutorily awarded ag research excluded from the comparison metrics

 

in the case of Syracuse they ad gone with a "help the region" approach to research under their president at the time (and still now) and so they were starting to do a lot of research on social work, "poverty", trying to rebuild cities that are declining and the like and a lot of that was funded from the state, from regional organizations, from the university itself, or otherwise not competitively awarded.....and it also was not of "national or international interest" (or some type of wording) which the AAU really looks at and is interested in

so Syracuse tried to say they were not getting a proper evaluation either, but the AAU told them plenty of other schools do similar types of research and they still find a way to do STEM and Life Science research with a national and global impact as well and in much larger dollar amounts

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DeadArmadillo

DeadArmadillo 907

Posted
Posted
On 1/30/2020 at 12:15 PM, Steel Shank said:

The state of Texas would have a kickass baseball conference if we went the regional conference route for "non-revenue" sports.

 

I bet the state of Texas could have two full kick ass conferences in just about every non revenue sport except hockey and skiing.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
J.R. Juniors Junior Jr.

J.R. Juniors Junior Jr. 1113

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, ButtFumble said:

.no that was one of two excuses NU tried to use

but the AAU made it clear that was nonsense for several reasons

1. there are a number of members in the AAU that do not have a medical school including Rice, Texas (at the time before Dell was started), and aggy before aggy had merged all of their medical components under the main campus

2. NU had about a decade of warnings that they were in danger of being booted and they could have merged their stand alone medical school if that would have made a difference and I doubt the City of Omaha or NU-Omaha had the power to stop that merger if it mattered

3. the most important reason and why the merger never happened.....the AAU does not simply compare universities to each other they break them down into various groups

private universities, public universities, universities with a medical school, universities without medical schools, universities in states that have a large number of public universities (like Texas, Ohio, and California) and universities in states with very few public universities (like Kansas and Nebraska)

then they compare universities in those groups as well....the medical school in the NU System is not really a research powerhouse and I do not think it has a number of highly recognized faculty on staff and that is not to knock on it that is just the reality.....so merging that medical school into the main university really would not have boosted the metrics especially when NU went from being compared to similar universities without a medical school to ones with a medical school

 

NU also claimed that it was unfair that the AAU excluded some agricultural research....mainly research that is statutorily awarded for being a land grant university instead of being competitively awarded

the AAU does exclude some research especially statutorily awarded land grant research and they give more weight to life science research and some other types over other types and for all of it they really look at competitively awarded research (vs state funded research or university funded research or private research that was funded without any grant process open to many schools)

again this was just a smoke screen because many members of the AAU are land grant schools including the vast majority of the Big 10 (UM, Indiana, Northwestern, and Iowa are the 4 that are not).....so 10 out of 14 members of the Big 10 are also land grant schools and 100% of them along with all of the other non-Big 10 land grant schools in the AAU have their statutorily awarded ag research excluded from the comparison metrics

 

in the case of Syracuse they ad gone with a "help the region" approach to research under their president at the time (and still now) and so they were starting to do a lot of research on social work, "poverty", trying to rebuild cities that are declining and the like and a lot of that was funded from the state, from regional organizations, from the university itself, or otherwise not competitively awarded.....and it also was not of "national or international interest" (or some type of wording) which the AAU really looks at and is interested in

so Syracuse tried to say they were not getting a proper evaluation either, but the AAU told them plenty of other schools do similar types of research and they still find a way to do STEM and Life Science research with a national and global impact as well and in much larger dollar amounts

As someone who lived in the NE, Syracuse is mostly considered a undergrad-heavy school with its best grad programs being professional rather than academic.  No one attends SU to get a Ph.D. thinking that they will end up a professor at a major U.  SU is also hurt by the fact that the more-prestigious SUNY college of Environmental Science and Upstate Medical University are both across the street but not at all part of SU, so they don't figure into SU's research.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ButtFumble

ButtFumble 5297

Posted
Posted
41 minutes ago, J.R. Juniors Junior Jr. said:

As someone who lived in the NE, Syracuse is mostly considered a undergrad-heavy school with its best grad programs being professional rather than academic.  No one attends SU to get a Ph.D. thinking that they will end up a professor at a major U.  SU is also hurt by the fact that the more-prestigious SUNY college of Environmental Science and Upstate Medical University are both across the street but not at all part of SU, so they don't figure into SU's research.

 

SUNY College of Environmental Science and FORESTRY.....the old alumni would freak out for leaving off the Forestry

what you say is true though and New York has a lot of those arrangements with private universities and public affiliations including Cornell and others

Texas is one of the few others with Baylor College of Medicine though

Syracuse sold off the medical school a long time ago, but they have talked about trying to start one again, but Upstate is very against it

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...