I was married to a woman from Cozad, NE, so I've seen that up close...and it's definitely a different world. I've never dismissed that athletics is important to lots of people...it certainly has been and is to me (although that relationship has certainly changed over the years...especially recent years). I could also point to big northeastern cities and their suburbs and the millions of people there who don't really care about college sports. People on a board/site like this seem to forget that not everyone is like them. I was one of those nationally recruited (for academics) students. Yes, I looked at PSU because I grew up a huge PSU fan and it was a pretty short drive away. Yet I went to VT, a school I don't think I had ever heard of before I cracked open one of those big books in the guidance office in search of good engineering...and whose athletics were pretty much a nothingburger nationally at the time...certainly in football. But, again, I'm not saying athletics isn't helpful in attracting students...I just question *how* helpful and where the line lies that defines where the dollars, like VT has recently committed to, don't make sense anymore. Is that rather indirect way of "branding" the university really the most effective path? I don't really take issue with a lot of what you're saying...my primary issue has been with how people link the academic success of a university to athletic prowess (and conference membership)...how many people on these boards seem to think that VT's academic reputation somehow owes more credit to football than to, you know, the actual academic work it does. I would think you could see how that might be kind of offensive/insulting to an academic. ** Edited by Pylons at 11/8/2025, 8:22:09 AM