<p>
</p>
<p>And even by that measure, only just barely.</p>
<p>ACC average US News rank: 50.5
Big Ten average US News Rank: 52.9</p>
<p>And the two bottom-ranking schools in the ACC (Florida State and NC State) rank 25 and 32 places, respectively, behind Big Ten bottom-dweller Michigan State in the US News ranking. So all in all, I’d call it pretty much a wash, with more room for embarrassment on the ACC side.</p>
<p>
Interestingly “we” is not inclusive of academics…who actually might know something about academics.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Another good point, UCB.</p>
<p>Average PA score, ACC: 3.625
Average PA score, Big Ten: 3.836</p>
<p>I guess we know which conference the academics think is “academically superior.”
By this measure, 5 ACC schools (Clemson, Florida State, Miami, NC State, Virginia Tech) rank at or below the level of Big ten bottom-dweller Michigan State (3.4). At 3.0, Florida State is nearly a full point below the Big Ten average.</p>
<p>Let’s do a school-by-school analysis of Big 10 vs. ACC from an academic standpoint (USNWR):</p>
<p>Duke (#9) > Northwestern (#12)
UVA (#25) > UMich (#29)
Wake Forest (#25) > Wisconsin (#45)!!!
UNC Chapel Hill (#30) > Illinois (#47)!!!
Boston College (#31) > Penn State (#47)!!!
Georgia Tech (#35) > Ohio State (#56)!!!
Miami (#47) > Purdue (#56)
Maryland (#56) > Minnesota (#64)
Clemson (#64) > Iowa (#72)
Virginia Tech (#69) > Indiana (#75)
Michigan State (#79) > Florida State (#104)
Nebraska (#104) > NC State (#111)</p>
<p>CONCLUSION
So, the ACC wipes the floor with the Big 10 academically and wins by a 10-2 margin.</p>
<ol>
<li>The top 2 schools in the ACC are slightly better academically than the top 2 schools in the B10.</li>
<li>Schools 3-6 in the ACC are SIGNIFICANTLY STRONGER academically than schools 2-6 in the B10.</li>
<li>Schools 7-10 in the ACC are slightly better academically than schools 7-10 in the B10.</li>
<li>Schools 11-12 in the B10 are slightly better academically than schools 11-12 in the ACC.</li>
</ol>
<p>Congratulations Big 10 fans, your 2 bottom feeders are better than the ACC’s 2 bottom feeders. Bravo! The middle of the ACC BLOWS AWAY the middle of the B10.</p>
<p>The ACC is the best conference academically in the country besides the Ivy League schools. There are no contenders, only pretenders.;)</p>
<h2>6 million Mormons do not equal 68 million catholics…However, I see your point. I do not see how BYU will ever again be a major player, big time independent, with the current BCS setup. ~ Rjkonovi</h2>
<p>Nor do they need to be equal. It’s not about how many people actually tune-in to watch a game. It’s about how many TV sets the network is broadcast too.</p>
<p>So if there TV station reaches major markets, they get a percentage of every TV set, whether a person watches or not.</p>
<p>Much like the Big10, which is automatically bundled into TV packages and the subscriber pays the network whether they watch 1 game or 20 games, it doesn’t matter - that station is bundled.</p>
<p>It’s not about actual viewers, just how many television sets your station reaches. This same philosophy was behind the push for Rutgers to join the big 10. Everyone knows that NYC doesn’t follow Rutgers, but it would allow the B10 to broadcast their network to every household in the NYC market.</p>
<p>See what I’m saying? They make money on the number of television sets their network gets sent to, not based on viewers, and since their followers are spread across the country, and in major markets like California, selling their network to cable providers is very possible.</p>
<p>Well done lesdiablesbleus</p>
<p>What’s the deal with the TCU rumors to the BE?</p>
<p>The BE should take take Boise State along with TCU, and just let the MWC/WAC merge.</p>
<p>Big Ten Network Alters Picture of College Sports</p>
<p>By JOE DRAPE
Published: October 1, 2010</p>
<p>CHICAGO These are confusing times to be a college football fan. The Big Ten will soon have 12 teams, the Big 12 only 10, and the Pacific-10 is on its way to having 12 teams. It really wishes it had 16. </p>
<p>A land grab is under way in college athletics, a media-savvy, multiplatform one led by Nebraskas defection to the Big Ten this summer and nothing is driving the change more than the Big Ten Network. In three years, it has grown to 42 million subscribers, covering 35 percent of the nation, and has opened powerful revenue sources for the biggest players in college athletics. </p>
<p>Now, conferences like the Pac-10 and the Big East and individual universities like Texas want their own network and are willing to abandon longtime allegiances to get them. Colorado and Utah, for example, will leave the Big 12 and the Mountain West for the Pac-10 next year. </p>
<p>It has unleashed value for us and given us options and opportunities we never had before, said Jim Delany, commissioner of the Big Ten and a driving force behind the network. When President Obama comes to the University of Michigan, we can televise it. When there are flood relief efforts in Iowa, we can be part of that. It has not only extended, but has changed the shape of our brand. </p>
<p>In 2008-9, programs in the Football Bowl Subdivision the top tier of college football increased their spending by nearly 11 percent from the previous year. At the same time, universities also increased their contribution to athletics by 28 percent. Still, only 14 of the 120 athletic programs in the F.B.S. made money in the 2008-9 academic year, down from 25 the year before, according to the N.C.A.A. </p>
<p>The network has also raised the profile of sports that do not attract big crowds. </p>
<p>In 2003, Delany complained to the National Association of Collegiate Directors of Athletics that its Directors Cup competition, which rewarded the best all-around athletic department, was driving up costs in Olympic and womens sports that do not come close to paying for themselves. He wanted the competition to end, or for the Big Ten to at least be excluded from it. </p>
<p>It is our belief that the Sears Cup Competition tends to exacerbate demands for greater resources by coaches, make cost control more difficult and finally fails to adequately recognize the accomplishments of the most broad-based programs, Delany wrote about the competition, which was once sponsored by Sears, in a letter obtained by The New York Times. </p>
<p>Seven years later, however, the Big Ten Network relies on, in the parlance of college athletics, those nonrevenue generating sports for a bulk of its 24-hour, 365-day programming, as well as its live streaming broadcasts. </p>
<p>We didnt know what theyd do, but most have overperformed, Delany said. Womens softball, wrestling and volleyball are pretty good and compelling programming. </p>
<p>The Big Ten Networks primary moneymakers, however, remain the more than 35 football games it airs, followed by 105 regular-season mens basketball games. On Sept. 18, for example, four nonconference and hardly marquee games like Michigan versus Massachusetts averaged a 5.64 Nielsen rating in the eight local markets, numbers that rival the local ratings on ESPN and the broadcast networks. </p>
<p>The network is a joint venture between the Big Ten (51 percent majority owner) and Fox Cable Networks, a division of News Corporation, and industry experts have estimated their 25-year agreement is worth $2.8 billion. Neither Delany nor the Big Ten Network president, Mark Silverman, would discuss specific numbers, saying only its profit has already more than doubled over 2009 as its ad revenue has risen 30 percent. </p>
<p>The Big Tens I.R.S. filing for the year ending June 2009 showed the network paid the conference $72 million. The media research firm SNL Kagan has estimated that the network had operating revenue of $203.9 million and cash flow of $35.9 million in 2009. This year, the figures are expected to rise to $229.5 million in revenue and $75.9 million in cash flow, according to SNL Kagan. </p>
<p>No one doubts the Big Tens rabid fan base. The 100,000-plus crowds at the Big House in Michigan or the Horseshoe at Ohio State on autumn Saturdays are evidence of that. So is Mojo Rosas bar and restaurant in the village of Egg Harbor, Wis., population 284, where the Big Ten Network is advertised on the front window and shown inside. Its reach, too, is staggering. Neal Pilson, a former president of CBS Sports and a television consultant, says the Big Tens footprint encompasses 35 percent of the nations population. It is available in 19 of the top 20 television markets. </p>
<p>Its not only widely viewed within its stronghold regions, but there is a very large and devoted alumni base in all parts of the country, Pilson said. When I was at CBS, we always knew we could put the Big Ten on in any region and it would do well. </p>
<p>In the media-saturated modern world, the Big Ten Network has become yet another recruiting tool. Last summer, Treyvon Green, a highly regarded running back from suburban Dallas, verbally committed to play for Northwestern in 2011. He had never stepped foot on Northwesterns campus in Evanston, Ill.; most everything he knew about the university he had learned from the Big Ten Network. </p>
<p>Northwestern is a good fit for me and my family, Green told Wildcat.com shortly after he committed. Theyll be able to watch me on TV on the Big Ten Network, and thats important. I know they have great academics and a good football team. </p>
<p>Nebraska left the Big 12 for multiple reasons, chief among them that the balance of power and revenue tilted south to the University of Texas and Oklahoma. Nebraska Athletic Director Tom Osborne said, however, that the Big Ten Network was a draw and that the alliance would be mutually beneficial. </p>
<p>Nebraska football, after all, is a public trust, one cherished by the denizens of the state. </p>
<p>We have 1.8 million people, I dont know how many television sets, but what we do bring is that most of them will be turned on when we play, Osborne said in a bit of understatement. There is no doubt that the Big Ten Network has not only roiled college athletics but has also increased its value. When the Pac-10 commissioner, Larry Scott, tried to woo such Big 12 stalwarts like Texas and Oklahoma over the summer, discussions about a network were part of the promises. He remains willing to steal the Big Ten Networks playbook. </p>
<p>Scott might have failed to create the first true super conference this time but by adding Colorado and Utah, he strengthened the Pac-10s foundation to add members and build a network. The conference currently has football contracts with ESPN/ABC and Fox Sports Net, and a basketball agreement with FSN. Each football contract expires after the 2011 season and the FSN basketball deal after the 2011-12 season. </p>
<p>Twelve teams gives us more content, Scott said. </p>
<p>The Big Ten still has a 10-year, $1 billion deal with ABC/ESPN that runs through 2016. When it is up, Delany said he believed those rights would be worth even more. It is not the goal of the Big Ten Network to be the sole rights holder. </p>
<p>This is an evolutionary, not revolutionary arrangement, he said, adding that it was important that all conferences continued to have a relationship with the major networks, including ABC/ESPN and CBS. </p>
<p>Silverman, the Big Ten Networks president, remains busy creating programming for a very particular audience. Its prime-time football ratings are up 30 percent from last year, and the studio shows are showing increases from last year. </p>
<p>But it is the success of the new show, Big Ten Icons its highest-rated nonevent show that best demonstrates that the conferences devotees have a deep connection to their universities. The 20-episode series is hosted by Keith Jackson and profiles superstars like Jack Nicklaus, Charles Woodson and Steve Alford. </p>
<p>I think the size and scale of our audience, and how they understand history and appreciate tradition is unique to the Big Ten, Silverman said. We are profitable, and we will continue to grow more. </p>
<p>Source: [The</a> New York Times > Log In](<a href=“Big Ten Network Alters Landscape of College Athletics - The New York Times”>Big Ten Network Alters Landscape of College Athletics - The New York Times) CQ</p>
<p>Stupid Cal AD and Chancellor decide to drop Cal baseball before a new Pac-12 TV deal is reached. I suspect baseball will be a huge part of PAC-12 TV in the spring months…Shortsighted Cal admin decided not to be part of that revenue.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It all depends on what you mean by “academics.”</p>
<p>If one is to go by NRC rankings or Int’l rankings (or peer academic scores), than the B10 schools wipes the floor w/ the ACC.</p>
<p>Otoh, if one is to go strictly by USNWR - which favors private and smaller public universities, than the ACC, not surprisingly, has the edge (not only does the ACC have smaller public schools, but 4 private schools compared to the B10’s 1).</p>
<p>But anyway, congrats on thumping your chest!</p>
<p>With the Big Ten dominated by very large publics and the ACC populated by more privates and small to mid-sized publics, it’s no surprise undergrad US News rankings slightly favor the ACC.</p>
<p>But at the graduate school level - across the board - the difference in quality is not subtle. The Big Ten is much, much higher ranked across the board in all academic areas, especially the sciences, math and engineering.</p>
<p>Undergraduate rankings show the ACC to be slightly superior. Graduate rankings show the Big Ten to be clearly better. Conferences exist for sports. 99%+ of scholarship athletes are in undergrad. In discussions of which conference is academically superior, bringing in grad programs is a red herring. This is a complex argument that Big Ten boosters on this forum fail to grasp. You might need to go back to the Big Ten for grad school to understand it.</p>
<p>PS: For every grad school student at a Big Ten school there are 3 undergrads. Concentrating on the grad programs is concentrating on a minority of students to prove the greater schools’ superiority.</p>
<p>“Undergraduate rankings show the ACC to be slightly superior.”</p>
<p>Not really. Most rankings show that the Big 10 and the ACC are academic peers. Even the USWNR undergraduate academic reputation index does not differentiate between ACC and Big 10 schools.</p>
<p>Duke 90
Northwestern 89
Michigan 88
UVa 86</p>
<p>UNC 84
Georgia Tech 84
Wisconsin 81</p>
<p>Illinois 78
Boston College 77
Penn State 77
Purdue 77
Minnesota 76
Ohio State 75
Wake Forest 75 </p>
<p>Iowa 73
Indiana 73
Maryland 73
Virginia Tech 73
Michigan State 70</p>
<p>Clemson 69
Miami 68
NC State 66</p>
<p>Florida State 64</p>
<p>In terms of overall undergraduate academic excellence, the Big 10 and the ACC are roughly equal.</p>
<p>Undergraduate Engineering</p>
<h1>4 Georgia Tech</h1>
<h1>6 Illinois</h1>
<h1>7 Michigan</h1>
<h1>8 Purdue</h1>
<h1>13 Northwestern</h1>
<h1>13 Virginia Tech</h1>
<h1>13 Wisconsin</h1>
<h1>17 Penn State</h1>
<h1>19 Maryland</h1>
<h1>22 Duke</h1>
<h1>22 Minnesota</h1>
<h1>26 NC State</h1>
<h1>26 OSU</h1>
<h1>36 UVa</h1>
<h1>40 Michigan State</h1>
<h1>56 Clemson</h1>
<p>The edge for undergraduate Engineering clearly belongs to the Big 10</p>
<p>Undergraduate Business</p>
<h1>4 Michigan</h1>
<h1>5 UVa</h1>
<h1>7 UNC</h1>
<h1>10 Indiana</h1>
<h1>14 Illinois</h1>
<h1>14 OSU</h1>
<h1>14 Wisconsin</h1>
<h1>19 Maryland</h1>
<h1>19 Minnesota</h1>
<h1>19 Purdue</h1>
<h1>23 Boston College</h1>
<h1>23 Penn State</h1>
<h1>28 Georiga Tech</h1>
<h1>28 Michigan State</h1>
<h1>34 Iowa</h1>
<h1>34 Wake Forest</h1>
<h1>42 Virginia Tech</h1>
<p>For undergraduate Business, the Big 10 and ACC are pretty even.</p>
<p>This claim that the ACC is academically superior to the Big 10 for undergraduate studies is unfounded and not supported by any credible source.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I suspect it still wouldn’t have made the sport profitable.</p>
<p>Undergrad rankings are far more arbitrary and suspect than grad rankings and grad departments are just the individual departments that also teach undergrads (in most cases) so they are very relevant to undergrads as well as grad students. The constant implication that grad rankings have no importance to undergrads is the false claim.</p>
<p>^^^Well done barrons. So true and informative. ;-)</p>
<p>I find it interesting that there is an actual ranking of universities that is used for the undergraduate level, and those advocating that the Big Ten is a better conference would rather use the graduate or department specific rankings (or some random international ranking that no one has ever heard of). Goes to show you can find something on the internet to back-up almost any argument, even one as rediculous as the Big Ten>>ACC academically.</p>
<p>What is “rediculous” (sp) is that when someone is presented with the few areas where USNWR actually rates schools in UNDERGRADUATE programs, he/she immediately dismisses it as unimportant. This same person looks at the overall undergraduate USNWR rankings and just assumes because of them that the ACC is academically superior. The schools in the B10 OVERALL are superior to the schools in the ACC as complete academic institutions.</p>
<p>^ informative, if you want a measure of “undergraduate academic programs” and use the USNWR ranking, you have to use the peer assessment measure. This is the only criteria in the USNWR ranking that attempts to even address “academic excellence” of undergraduate programs.</p>
<p>^lol. I rest my case.</p>