I agree. However, sometimes action is not initiated until a tragedy happens. Perhaps this was part of the Cal’s administration game plan…cancel and then reinstate when the alumni cry and pony up the money.</p>
<p>I’ve read that alumni (including some former Cal MLB players) are trying to raise money to save the cut programs. So far, it’s been said they’ve gotten $10 million in pledges to keep the 4 cut sports for a period of several years while they work on a more sustainable business model. They need to keep the 4 sports to remain in compliance with Title IX. </p>
<p>The alumni group is supposed to meet with the Chancellor soon to discuss the plan and hopefully get the programs reinstated. However, damage to these teams has already been done due to the administration’s short-sightedness.</p>
<p>To be fair, Nebraska fans are very good. The school even has fans who have no affiliation with the university. It is a large public university with a good fanbase and is in the heartland. Pretty much made sense.</p>
<p>The only problem that I have is that the Big Ten blatantly ignored the academics of the institution. An addition should not just increase the athletic reputation of the conference, but also the academic reputation. Prior to expansion, the Big Ten had one of the top academic profiles in the country (only behind the Ivy and ACC). Nebraska pulled the conference down a little. ND would have obviously been a better choice, or any university in the midwest with a strong sports program, large fanbase and a top 100 national research university.</p>
<p>The Big 10 also extended offers to Texas-Austin, Colorado-Boulder, Missouri and Notre Dame. Overall, I think academics and athletics were taken into account.</p>
<p>Notre Dame will never join. They would rather remain mediocre but Independent than be part of a conference. </p>
<p>Personally, I would love to see Chicago revive its athletic participation in the Big 10 (it remains part of the conference academically) and to have Texas-Austin join the conference. </p>
<ol>
<li><p>George Wells Beadle (1926, MS 1927) - Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine ( 1958) for the “discovery that genes act by regulating definite chemical events”; served on the faculty of the California Institute of Technology, Harvard, and Stanford University; president of the University of Chicago. </p></li>
<li><p>Alan Heeger (BS 1956, honorary doctorate 1999) - Nobel Prize for Chemistry (2000 ) for the “discovery and development of conductive polymers.” </p></li>
<li><p>Donald Cram (1942) - Nobel Prize for Chemistry (1987) for the “development and use of molecules with structure-specific interactions of high selectivity.” </p></li>
</ol>
<p>Pulitzer Prize:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Ted Kooser (MA 1968) - An American poet who was the thirteenth Poet Laureate of the United States, serving two terms from 2004 to 2006. He teaches as a Visiting Professor in the English department of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. On August 12, 2004, he was named Poet Laureate Consultant in Poetry by the Librarian of Congress to serve a term from October 2004 through May 2005. In April 2005, Ted Kooser was appointed to serve a second term as Poet Laureate Consultant in Poetry. During that same week Kooser received the 2005 Pulitzer Prize for Poetry for his book “Delights and Shadows” (2004). </p></li>
<li><p>Karen Blessen (1973) - first graphic artist to win a Pulitzer Prize (in explanatory journalism) for a 1989 a special section, created with two colleagues, for the Dallas Morning News called “Anatomy of An Air Crash” </p></li>
<li><p>Willa Cather (1895) - Pulitzer Prize in 1923 for her wartime novel, One of Ours </p></li>
<li><p>Marjie Lundstrom (1978) - Pulitzer Prize in 1991 as a national reporter for the Gannett News service, for which she wrote a series on child-abuse deaths. </p></li>
<li><p>Harvey Newbranch (1896) - Pulitzer Prize for a 1919 editorial condemning the lynching of an African American man by a racist mob; editor of the Omaha World-Herald for 56 years </p></li>
<li><p>James Risser (1959) - Pulitzer Prize in 1976 for exposing corruption in the U.S. grain exporting industry and another Pulitzer Prize in 1979 for a series of articles showing the destructive impact of modern agriculture on the environment (both as Washington D.C. bureau chief for the Des Moines Register) </p></li>
<li><p>John J. Pershing (JD 1893) - 1932 Pulitzer Prize in history for his memoir; the only person to be promoted in his own lifetime to the highest rank ever held in the United States Army—General of the Armies (George Washington was granted this posthumously); led the American Expeditionary Force in World War I and was regarded as a mentor by the generation of American generals who led the United States Army in Europe during World War II, including George C. Marshall, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Omar Bradley and George S. Patton. </p></li>
</ol>
<p>Plus (+)</p>
<h2>*Warren Buffett (1950) - billionaire and one of the wealthiest men in the world today (continuously listed among Forbes 400 starting in 1979); chairman of the board of Berkshire Hathaway </h2>
<p>Pretty impressive if you ask me!! Go Huskers!! lol</p>
<p>UCB, such offers will ever be “formal” unless the talks are very advanced. There were talks, but obviously, Texas never committed to the Big 10, so no official invitation was made. This said, to suggest that it was merely speculation is downplaying the turn of events. </p>
<p>Texas will ultimately end up in the Big 10 or the Pac 10. The Big XII is not viable in the long term. Personally I think Texas is a better fit in the Big 10.</p>
<p>Correct!!! Indeed, University of Iowa is the only Big Ten / CIC school that has not had any Nobel Prize alum association. Although Nobel Prize is really a minute reflection of the whole academic picture for an institution, so far as I am concerned, UNL fits in the Big Ten league rather well if based only on this particular indicator.</p>
<p>University of Nebraska - Lincoln: 3 (2 undergraduate) </p>
<p>I was also surprised (ok, not really…) to learn that one particular academically reknown Pac-10 school has zero alum associated with Nobel Prize, and yet it is ranked in the Top-25 overall…</p>
<p>Which Pac 10 school is that? The only three top 25 Pac 10 schools are Stanford, Cal and UCLA and all three had alums that went on to win the Prize. </p>
<p>I was surprised with Stanford, which only has 8 (only 2 undergrad) alums that have won the Nobel Prize. </p>
<p>Brown, Dartmouth and Duke combined have produced a mere 6 Nobel Prize winners between them (only 4 undergrad). Not all elite universities have done well with Nobel production. I would include Michigan in that group of underachievers.</p>
<p>^^“Which Pac 10 school is that? The only three top 25 Pac 10 schools are Stanford, Cal and UCLA and all three had alums that went on to win the Prize.”</p>
<p>Dude, I am looking. There are only three Pac 10 schools in the top 25 and all of them have produced Nobel Prize winning alums (Cal 25, Stanford 8 and UCLA 6).</p>
<p>By the way, the Southern schools really don’t do well:
Duke University: 2 (0 undergraduate)
Emory University: 0
University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill: 1 (1 undergrad)
University of Texas-Austin: 2 (1 undergraduate)
University of Virginia: 0
Vanderbilt University: 1 (1 undergraduate)</p>
</p>