|
Legislature Backing Baylor?Moderators: PonyPride, SmooPower
28 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Legislature Backing Baylor?"...there is a block of 15 legislators working to make sure that Baylor, not Colorado, is invited to join the Pac-10."
http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/ncf/news/story?id=5256377 Now it's really getting crazy. UT not only has a Tech problem, they may have a bear problem too. Nobody in football should be called a genius. A genius is a guy like Norman Einstein.
- Joe Theismann
Re: Legislature Backing Baylor?This is good for us...
We need the Pac 10 to just get tired of this texas bullshti and go back to just utah and colorado....then the MWC explodes We need 2 conferences to get rocked not just 1...
Re: Legislature Backing Baylor?meh, Gov and UT lege's will get it done.
Re: Legislature Backing Baylor?now it could really get interesting for the MWC if both the PAC 10 and Big 10 expand to 16 teams and Baylor gets the PAC 10 invite instead of Colorado. Would the MWC take Colorado, Kansas and KSU rather than Boise? Is that the better move for them, assuming Nebraska and Missou are off to the Big 10 at the same time?
Re: Legislature Backing Baylor?
I don't know how many Baylor alums are in the legislature, but Baylor grads tend to belong to the most influential Baptist churches in their communities, and Baptists are usually the biggest voting block. Having said that: Gov: Aggie Lite Gov: Arizona Speaker: Some Ivy League school. Interestingly, Jim Pitts is chair of House Appropriations. This makes him a HUGE power player. He is an SMU grad. It might not hurt to send an e mail his way about this issue.
Re: Legislature Backing Baylor?
We need to create a Bush problem.
Re: Legislature Backing Baylor?There's no way the Pac-10 or, by then, the Pac-15 will accept a non-secular school. That's why BYU was ruled out if I recall correctly. If the Texas legislature passes this "all for one, one for all" BS agreement then the Pac-10 will find other teams to invite or stay content at 10.
Re: Legislature Backing Baylor?Everyone and their grandmother.......
From Topeka Capital Calling all politicians | EMAIL | PRINT | COMMENT | SHARE BY KEVIN HASKIN June 6, 2010 - 7:19pm Calling all politicians. Pat Roberts, Sam Brownback, Kathleen Sebelius, Mark Parkinson ... anyone with any connections whatsoever. Be it a regent, congressman, mayor, board chairman, entertainer or evangelist. The time is now to get involved on behalf of Kansas and Kansas State. Find a phone number or address for Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman and rehearse a persuasive plea. PLEEEESE! Do not abandon longtime partners you've competed against, and cajoled with, since helmets were made of leather. While the dynamics of conference realignment are all about football, the shaky future of the Big 12 is more than just an athletics matter for KU and K-State. If the Wildcats and Jayhawks are no longer competing in the big-time — repeat, rinse, repeat: B-C-S — virtually anything at K-State and KU could be affected. Adversely. Both would still strive to be exemplary universities, retain great faculty, conduct breakthrough research and graduate sharp, promising professionals. But enrollment could decline, perhaps significantly. Without as much sports exposure — be it daily on ESPN updates or over the course of a team schedule through television opportunities — the universities lose invaluable branding. In turn, their relevance suffers. Scoff if you want. Prolong the traditional feud between academics and athletics. But if Jon Wefald proved anything as president at Kansas State, it was the vitality of an athletic program can revive a university. The repairs Wefald promoted, and approved, for the university's front porch reached all the way to the deepest stack in the campus library he was able to reconstruct. The contract for the new National Bio and Agra-Defense Facility wasn't sealed in purple ink, but whatever attention Kansas State gained by competing on the national level in the Big 12 didn't hamper the negotiations. A prosperous future, however, is now in jeopardy. Red is indeed Big in this matter. Control rests with Nebraska. The move it makes could well dictate the very existence of the Big 12. At issue is the apparent dissatisfaction of athletic director Tom Osborne over perceived slights by the Big 12 and the power Texas exerts in the conference. Be it the locations of championship sites or the conference office, the elimination of recruits who were partial qualifiers, the second put back on the clock in last year's championship football game, or the recruiting advantages Texas supposedly can tap in its football-fertile state, some, or all, of those issues gnaw on the legendary coach. Enough that he would favor jumping to the Big Ten? Perhaps. If so, Texas figures to lead a defection by the Big 12 South into the Pac-10. Yes, the entire South now that Texas legislators are demanding Baylor be included in any move rather than Colorado. Calls can, and probably have, been made to Osborne by his coaching friend, Bill Snyder. In addition, Lew Perkins should attempt to capitalize on whatever relationship he's developed with Osborne on the administrative front — solid enough that the KU athletic director was influenced by Osborne's recommendation to hire Turner Gill. The problem in college athletics is it's only natural to look out for yourself first and foremost. Osborne may sense, especially given any perceived grievances, the Huskers are better off in the Big Ten. If that's the case, only Perlman can overrule. And that won't be easy considering Osborne, the icon, is involved in Nebraska's football recovery. Still, it's important for any Kansan with political clout to get involved in this critical phase of the Big 12 "process." Especially if a time frame — firm or not — exists stipulating Nebraska divulge its intentions. Texas prefers, by all accounts, to preserve the Big 12. So does Oklahoma. Those are the two other football powers calling the shots. And if the Big 12 does survive, Fox might be persuaded to provide a lucrative television package, though the network also will find any Pac-10 expansion attractive. Hey, if Nebraska stays, the rest of the Big 12 could agree to throw the Huskers a bone. Stage the Big 12 title game in Lincoln one time. Send the basketball tournament to the Qwest Center. Keep Osborne supplied for life in Centrum Silver. Kansans should be first to take up a collection. That Big 12 revenue stream that looked somewhat puny compared to the Big Ten or SEC would dwindle to almost nothing if KU and K-State are left in some Midlands abyss. Just try covering the costs of scholarships, travel and salaries without the benefits of BCS affiliation. Good luck retaining Bill Self. Or Frank Martin. This is serious stuff. Serious enough to return from Europe and get involved in if you're the KU chancellor. Serious enough to call on senators with school ties (Roberts and Brownback) if you're the K-State president. Pacify Osborne. Stroke Perlman. Beg if you must. And don't hesitate to wear red. Kevin Haskin
Re: Legislature Backing Baylor?
Gov: Close and buddy of Bush. "I think Couchem is right."
-EVERYONE
Re: Legislature Backing Baylor?
So...Yale to the Big 12?
Re: Legislature Backing Baylor?Assuming they actually drop such a bill in the state legislature, it will be interesting to see if Baylor still has the muscle to push it all the way through in the face of what I would guess is opposition from UT, A&M, and Tech supporters in the leg. I would think that being forced to go as a four school package would really cramp the style of UT and A&M and limit their options in the future. Considering how fluid this whole college conference situation has been over the past 20 years, I wouldn't think they would want to hinder their future prospects like that.
Baylor brings nothing to the table except political power in Austin. How much of that political power is left over from 1994 remains to be seen. I would have to think the big 3 public schools are getting sick of Baylor. They were forced to bring them to the party in 1994. Since then Baylor has had 14 years to prove they belong (in the revenue sports). With the exception of 1 basketball season, they have utterly failed. Baylor brings absolutely zero to the table that the other three schools don't already have.
Re: Legislature Backing Baylor?Baylor is actually very unique. I am sure the Pac 10 and many other conferences look at Baylor and its location in Waco and think, wow, Waco! Surely Waco is on everyone's list of places to see before one dies!
![]()
Re: Legislature Backing Baylor?
Well, there's not a single member of the Senate that's a Mustang. Couple of Frogs though, one of whom went to law school at Baylor. Aside from Pitts, I know of two House members whom I've met that are SMU alums. One is a UT season ticket holder and hasnt been to a game at Ford. The other...well, they say if you can't say anything nice about someone..
Re: Legislature Backing Baylor?Does anyone really believe that the whorns will let Baylor screw up this deal if the Pac-10 says no to Baylor? I suspect that the whorns and their college station brethern have too much pull to let that happen.
GO PONIES!!!
Re: Legislature Backing Baylor?
oh yeah. Straus went to Vandy.
28 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Who is onlineUsers browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests |
|