This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.

Important notes on articles:

• Please do not copy entire articles into your post; rather, provide links to them.. We are now links-only for ALL Internet publications. If only a small portion of the article pertains to your post, Fair Use allows you to copy those one or two paragraphs, provided you cite the author's name and the publication for which he writes. Otherwise, put a link in the HTTP Link box.
• Even if you're copying a reference to an article, provide a link to the page from which the article came. We're trying to cut down on duplicate topics, and the posting process will check the link to your article to see if it's already being discussed on this board. At the very least, you'll save yourself some grief on the boards.
• If your first reaction after reading the article you're going to share is the author is uninformed / stupid / a jerk / all of the above, it's not worth sharing with anyone. Not every article needs to be discussed. The more the hair-pulling articles are discussed (e.g. ESPN Page 2), the more the authors will write hair-pulling articles.

Post being replied to

ND and the Big Ten - Academic issues by JackMack

Sorry if this has been discussed (if so, please guide me to the discussion). But I seem to recall that, when ND considered joining the Big Ten in 2003, there was a lot of discussion about the academic side of the equation. I seem to remember reading that colleges/universities within an athletic conferences have important links and alliances on the academic side (research resources and other tools), although a quick online search doesn't show me anything on that. And I seem to recall that, in 2003, that potential academic affiliation with the Big Ten was an important factor in the decision making. Indeed, I seem to recall that the faculty - whose opinion was solicited by the University - was in favor of joining the conference as they felt that the Big Ten offered much more than was available to them at that time through some sort of unofficial alliance they had with some one or more other universitie).

In the current discussions (in the media, online, etc.), I'm hearing no mention of this academic side of the issue. Is my memory totally wrong about academic links and the 2003 consideration? If I'm right, why aren't we hearing any discussion of that issue?

Thanks.