PDA

View Full Version : DNews reporting talks between Big X and...



statman
02-11-2010, 11:08 AM
TEXAS. Wow. Didn't see that one coming. They'd actually be a fantastic fit for the Big X.

www.detnews.com/article/20100211/SPORTS0203/2110451/1361/Report--Texas--Big-Ten-have--preliminary-exchanges--about-expansion

If that were to happen, TCU could get a Big XII invite in their spot. Without someone from the Big XII-South leaving, I don't see any way that TCU gets into the Big XII . So Texas leaving would be great for TCU...

If UT goes to Big X, PAC-10 expansion would almost certainly follow. If the UU and Colorado get PAC-10 invites (which makes sense), BYU could very likely get an invite to the Big XII-North into Colorado's place. And all the worthy members of the MWC would all be taken care of - and the MWC's autobid would be relegated to the dustbin.

The MWC would be a shell of what it was. The WAC would still be Boise State and a whole lot of suckitude. I don't even see a decent 8-team league out of the scraps of the MWC/WAC. Boise State, AFA, ??? It would suck to be a Boise State fan...

Indy Coug
02-11-2010, 11:09 AM
What would be the motivation for Texas to leave? Their annual athletic revenue already exceeds any other collegiate program.

falafel
02-11-2010, 11:11 AM
There goes the only decent road trip destination if BYU were to join the Big 12. :(

Moliere
02-11-2010, 11:14 AM
What would be the motivation for Texas to leave? Their annual athletic revenue already exceeds any other collegiate program.

Let's see:

- Lots and lots of travel to the upper midwest instead of easy flights to Dallas, College Station, and Waco. Who doesn't want another two hours added to flights for away games.
- Playing games in the cold
- They can recruit stellar athletes from Ohio
- I"m sure they'll hold on to the athletes from TExas since all TExans want to play football in Michigan and Wisconsin in October and November.

Yep, definitely makes sense.

statman
02-11-2010, 11:15 AM
What would be the motivation for Texas to leave? Their annual athletic revenue already exceeds any other collegiate program.

Ease of winning their conference. They'd run roughshod over the Big X. The only competition right now is OSU. In The Big XII, there's always Oklahoma, and every year a couple other teams emerge as dangerous - Missou, TT, OKState, A&M (not for a while now, but still...)

Plus the Big X's TV contract is very good - likely better than what UT will eventually get when the rest of the Big-XII forces them to equal things out there a bit.

Indy Coug
02-11-2010, 11:17 AM
Ease of winning their conference. They'd run roughshod over the Big X. The only competition right now is OSU. In The Big XII, there's always Oklahoma, and every year a couple other teams emerge as dangerous - Missou, TT, OKState, A&M (not for a while now, but still...)

Plus the Big X's TV contract is very good - likely better than what UT will eventually get when the rest of the Big-XII forces them to equal things out there a bit.

Sorry, but this report is nothing more than a wet dream for people living in the Midwest that see their conference increasingly becoming an also-ran. Joining the Big XI does nothing for Texas. Even assuming what you say above is true (and I'm not conceding they are true), that's the positives and there are plenty of negatives that you haven't mentioned.

Hot Lunch
02-11-2010, 11:19 AM
Sorry, but this report is nothing more than a wet dream for people living in the Midwest that see their conference increasingly becoming an also-ran. Joining the Big XI does nothing for Texas. Even assuming what you say above is true (and I'm not conceding they are true), that's the positives and there are plenty of negatives that you haven't mentioned.

:iagree:

Texas will not join the Little 11.

Surfah
02-11-2010, 11:20 AM
Sorry, but this report is nothing more than a wet dream for people living in the Midwest that see their conference increasingly becoming an also-ran. Joining the Big XI does nothing for Texas. Even assuming what you say above is true (and I'm not conceding they are true), that's the positives and there are plenty of negatives that you haven't mentioned.

Yup.

woot
02-11-2010, 11:22 AM
What would be the motivation for Texas to leave? Their annual athletic revenue already exceeds any other collegiate program.

Academics is the only factor I could think of. Texas is a great university, much better than any other in the big 12, and the big 10 is overall a much better academic conference, so it would be a great fit. I would be shocked if it happened, though.

Indy Coug
02-11-2010, 11:25 AM
Academics is the only factor I could think of. Texas is a great university, much better than any other in the big 12, and the big 10 is overall a much better academic conference, so it would be a great fit. I would be shocked if it happened, though.

I always enjoy hearing the academic argument for conference affiliation.

:bsflag:

The only reason the academic argument exists in the first place is for the people that want to gloss over fact that the real reason why BYU won't get a PAC10 invite is due to ideological bigotry.

For two conferences that have all the money in the world and a firm geographical identity, academic compatibility is completely meaningless.

cougjunkie
02-11-2010, 11:27 AM
Let's see:

- Lots and lots of travel to the upper midwest instead of easy flights to Dallas, College Station, and Waco. Who doesn't want another two hours added to flights for away games.
- Playing games in the cold
- They can recruit stellar athletes from Ohio
- I"m sure they'll hold on to the athletes from TExas since all TExans want to play football in Michigan and Wisconsin in October and November.

Yep, definitely makes sense.

You forgot about leaving the conference of their two biggest rivals (Oklahoma and Texas A&M)

SeattleUte
02-11-2010, 11:28 AM
I always enjoy hearing the academic argument for conference affiliation.

:bsflag:

The only reason the academic argument exists in the first place is for the people that want to gloss over fact that the real reason why BYU won't get a PAC10 invite is due to ideological bigotry.

For two conferences that have all the money in the world and a firm geographical identity, academic compatibility is completely meaningless.

Signed, fan of a school with creationist professors.

SeattleUte
02-11-2010, 11:29 AM
"ideological bigotry" lol Orwell would have been charmed by that!

I confess to being ideologically bigoted against fascism, communism, and a whole bunch of other isms!

Indy Coug
02-11-2010, 11:30 AM
Signed, fan of a school with creationist professors.

If that's the best you can do today, then you've either had too much to drink or not enough --- I'm not sure which.

woot
02-11-2010, 11:31 AM
I always enjoy hearing the academic argument for conference affiliation.

:bsflag:

The only reason the academic argument exists in the first place is for the people that want to gloss over fact that the real reason why BYU won't get a PAC10 invite is due to ideological bigotry.

For two conferences that have all the money in the world and a firm geographical identity, academic compatibility is completely meaningless.

This is quite a silly bit of egocentrism. The big 10 prides itself on its academics, and is well-known as a great academic conference. Most of the people in big 10 country don't even know what BYU is, except that maybe they play football there.

byu71
02-11-2010, 11:31 AM
Academics is the only factor I could think of. Texas is a great university, much better than any other in the big 12, and the big 10 is overall a much better academic conference, so it would be a great fit. I would be shocked if it happened, though.

I really don't want to got tete-a-tete with you again, but it is an opening to something I was thinking about. If these conferences are really so concerned about their "academic" image, why isn't Harvard being considered for the Big East? Maybe Harvard wouldn't leave because of the fine academic reputation their league has. I know it is the Ivy league, but I doubt more than 1% of Americans could name more than 3 teams in it.

When you talk about someone's conference like the SEC vs the PAC10, how many people really care which "conference" has the best academic record?

Indy Coug
02-11-2010, 11:32 AM
This is quite a silly bit of egocentrism. The big 10 prides itself on its academics, and is well-known as a great academic conference. Most of the people in big 10 country don't even know what BYU is, except that maybe they play football there.

Wow, that's a serious counterargument, especially since the Big 10 isn't contemplating adding BYU.

SeattleUte
02-11-2010, 11:34 AM
This is quite a silly bit of egocentrism. The big 10 prides itself on its academics, and is well-known as a great academic conference. Most of the people in big 10 country don't even know what BYU is, except that maybe they play football there.

I think they also think of them as associated with some cult, to quote Phil Jackson. (Il Pad, don't kill the messenger.)

byu71
02-11-2010, 11:37 AM
This is quite a silly bit of egocentrism. The big 10 prides itself on its academics, and is well-known as a great academic conference. Most of the people in big 10 country don't even know what BYU is, except that maybe they play football there.

Believe me or not. I with a couple of other guys were on the bus from O'Hare airport to the rental car area. I have this hat on with the big Y. The driver asks, are you a BYU fan. I say yes and how did you know it was a BYU hat instead of a Yale hat. He says, who the hell does Yale play in football?

The guy said he loved watching BYU play football on ESPN. Obviously this experience happened prior to the Mountain.

woot
02-11-2010, 11:38 AM
I really don't want to got tete-a-tete with you again, but it is an opening to something I was thinking about. If these conferences are really so concerned about their "academic" image, why isn't Harvard being considered for the Big East? Maybe Harvard wouldn't leave because of the fine academic reputation their league has. I know it is the Ivy league, but I doubt more than 1% of Americans could name more than 3 teams in it.

When you talk about someone's conference like the SEC vs the PAC10, how many people really care which "conference" has the best academic record?

This is a perfect example of how academics trumps athletics (at least for a lot of schools). Harvard would never leave the Ivy League, because academics is much more important there than athletics. For conferences like the Big 10 and Pac 10, both are important considerations, and for most other conferences athletics are mostly where it's at.

Sports fans don't generally care about academics, and I don't blame them. It doesn't mean that it isn't a consideration.

Indy Coug
02-11-2010, 11:39 AM
This is a perfect example of how academics trumps athletics (at least for a lot of schools). Harvard would never leave the Ivy League, because academics is much more important there than athletics. For conferences like the Big 10 and Pac 10, both are important considerations, and for most other conferences athletics are mostly where it's at.

Sports fans don't generally care about academics, and I don't blame them. It doesn't mean that it isn't a consideration.

Oh, it might be a consideration, but it's about 25th on the list.

woot
02-11-2010, 11:40 AM
Wow, that's a serious counterargument, especially since the Big 10 isn't contemplating adding BYU.

Nor did I think you did. You did, however, suggest that the "academic argument" only gets play because of BYU's inferiority to other Pac10 schools. This thread wasn't about BYU before you brought it up.

byu71
02-11-2010, 11:41 AM
I think they also think of them as associated with some cult, to quote Phil Jackson. (Il Pad, don't kill the messenger.)

Do you think someone who is really good at trolling throws out the same hook over and over again. It is a serious question.

Ah, damn. You hooked me again. However, is it because the bait is good or because I am always hungry.

Indy Coug
02-11-2010, 11:41 AM
Nor did I think you did. You did, however, suggest that the "academic argument" only gets play because of BYU's inferiority to other Pac10 schools. This thread wasn't about BYU before you brought it up.

I brought up BYU once you brought up the academic argument because that's the only time I've seen that factor presented as a serious barrier to conference realignment.

byu71
02-11-2010, 11:46 AM
This is a perfect example of how academics trumps athletics (at least for a lot of schools). Harvard would never leave the Ivy League, because academics is much more important there than athletics. For conferences like the Big 10 and Pac 10, both are important considerations, and for most other conferences athletics are mostly where it's at.

Sports fans don't generally care about academics, and I don't blame them. It doesn't mean that it isn't a consideration.

We agree, we agree. I think it is a consideration, but a minor one when considering who someone wants in the conference or not.

The Ivy league is known for their academics and if the Ivy leauge was saying BYU academics is a big stumbling block to gaining entrance into the Ivy League, I would buy it.

I really think if Stanford announced they were leaving the PAC10 because the quality of academics at half the schools in the conference just didn't meet their standards, there would be more pissed of Stanford alum than all the other alum of all the other schools in the conference combined.

If the PAC10 could swap Stanford for Texas, it would be done in a heartbeat.

Moliere
02-11-2010, 11:47 AM
Is it possible to ignore someone in just one forum? For instance, if I wanted to ignore someone by the name of TacomaUte in The Stadium but still seem said person in The Foyer, is that possible? Please tell me it is.

I'm sick of discussing academics in a supposedly sports section and it seems every post in The Stadium ends up in a pissing match about BYU's science department and Ivy league schools, or at least some stupid argument on a similar level.

woot
02-11-2010, 11:48 AM
I brought up BYU once you brought up the academic argument because that's the only time I've seen that factor presented as a serious barrier to conference realignment.

That may be, but that just means you haven't been paying attention. We've talked at length about Big 10 expansion and how academics will play a big role. Seriously, it's not a coincidence that ND, Pitt, and now Texas are rumored to be in the mix. Missouri isn't a bad school, but if they are chosen over these other schools due to any reason other than rejection from all 3 of them, my claim will be falsified.

Indy Coug
02-11-2010, 11:49 AM
The Ivy league is known for their academics and if the Ivy leauge was saying BYU academics is a big stumbling block to gaining entrance into the Ivy League, I would buy it.


Sure, because the Ivy League doesn't award athletic scholarships, have a conference basketball tournament, participate in the 1-AA football playoffs, have their own TV contract or TV network and so on and so forth. They are the only conference where an academic argument would fly --- because they are obviously uninterested with being athletically competitive on a regional or national basis.

By the same token, no major school would seriously want to join the Ivy League in an athletic conference.

SeattleUte
02-11-2010, 11:50 AM
"Stanford, Cal-Berkeley and one or two others would absolutely have a heart attack if BYU was admitted into the Pac-10,"

http://www.sltrib.com/utahutes/ci_14377991

Indy Coug
02-11-2010, 11:51 AM
That may be, but that just means you haven't been paying attention. We've talked at length about Big 10 expansion and how academics will play a big role. Seriously, it's not a coincidence that ND, Pitt, and now Texas are rumored to be in the mix. Missouri isn't a bad school, but if they are chosen over these other schools due to any reason other than rejection from all 3 of them, my claim will be falsified.

Missouri has by far the worst athletic resume of any of the schools you have mentioned.

Indy Coug
02-11-2010, 11:52 AM
http://www.sltrib.com/utahutes/ci_14377991

To wit...


"It became very clear [in discussions with the Pac-10] that what we were dealing with was good old-fashioned religious discrimination that was masquerading as academic snobbery,"

SeattleUte
02-11-2010, 11:58 AM
To wit...

"Religious discrimination." That raises questions rather than answering them as far as whether there's anyting wrong with the Pac 10's attitude.

Surfah
02-11-2010, 11:59 AM
"Religious discrimination." That raises questions rather than answering them as far as whether there's anyting wrong with the Pac 10's attitude.

:confused:

woot
02-11-2010, 12:01 PM
So I guess the question becomes why so many Mormons insist on thinking that the Pac10's certain snub of BYU will be due to religious discrimination rather than due to academics. Is it the standard Mormon persecution complex cropping up? Is it the lack of realization of how terrible BYU's academic resume is? Is it just easier to believe that the problem is caused by discrimination rather than by actual inferiority?

At least you're acknowledging that issues other than athletics are at play or I don't think anyone would bet against BYU being the #1 choice for expansion, but why then go straight to martyrdom complex without pausing at some of BYU's obvious cultural and academic flaws, which the Pac10 explicitly states are the paramount considerations?

Surfah
02-11-2010, 12:04 PM
So I guess the question becomes why so many Mormons insist on thinking that the Pac10's certain snub of BYU will be due to religious discrimination rather than due to academics. Is it the standard Mormon persecution complex cropping up? Is it the lack of realization of how terrible BYU's academic resume is? Is it just easier to believe that the problem is caused by discrimination rather than by actual inferiority?

At least you're acknowledging that issues other than athletics are at play or I don't think anyone would bet against BYU being the #1 choice for expansion, but why then go straight to martyrdom complex without pausing at some of BYU's obvious cultural and academic flaws, which the Pac10 explicitly states are the paramount considerations?

You're funny.

SeattleUte
02-11-2010, 12:06 PM
:confused:

What's wrong with the Pac 10 saying that a university so closely tied financially and controlled by a religion is not a cultural fit for the Pac 10? It would not be innacurate to call that religious discrimination. Would the Pac 10 be immoral doing such a thing? We could have a long discussion about that.

Surfah
02-11-2010, 12:22 PM
What's wrong with the Pac 10 saying that a university so closely tied financially and controlled by a religion is not a cultural fit for the Pac 10? It would not be innacurate to call that religious discrimination. Would the Pac 10 be immoral doing such a thing? We could have a long discussion about that.

To be honest I don't think there is anything wrong with that position. But it's funny you don't afford BYU or the Church the same defense.

BYU will be passed over by the Pac-10 because of exactly what you stated above.

Indy Coug
02-11-2010, 12:28 PM
Let's assume for a second that the MWC had enough cachet to be attracting the likes of Cal or Stanford for conference expansion. Do you think BYU would be obstructing their addition to the MWC because of their policies regarding homosexuality?

Since the answer to that question is obviously "no", then it becomes clear where the bigotry lies.

SeattleUte
02-11-2010, 12:34 PM
To be honest I don't think there is anything wrong with that position. But it's funny you don't afford BYU or the Church the same defense.

BYU will be passed over by the Pac-10 because of exactly what you stated above.

BYU can do what it wants. But I'm not a cultural fit for BYU.

Surfah
02-11-2010, 12:43 PM
BYU can do what it wants. But I'm not a cultural fit for BYU.

That chasm isn't as wide as you'd like it to be.

byu71
02-11-2010, 12:48 PM
Let's assume for a second that the MWC had enough cachet to be attracting the likes of Cal or Stanford for conference expansion. Do you think BYU would be obstructing their addition to the MWC because of their policies regarding homosexuality?

Since the answer to that question is obviously "no", then it becomes clear where the bigotry lies.

YOu forget something very important. Cal and Stanford represent the "smart" people. BYU represents the "stupid" people.

Bigotry is only a result of "stupid" people and their action and thoughts. What you peceive as "bigoty" from Stanf. and Ca. is not bigoty, but actually just an understanding smart people have who are trying to educate the stupid people.

I think that is what I learned the last couple of days.

Color Me Badd Fan
02-11-2010, 01:20 PM
Let's assume for a second that the MWC had enough cachet to be attracting the likes of Cal or Stanford for conference expansion. Do you think BYU would be obstructing their addition to the MWC because of their policies regarding homosexuality?

Since the answer to that question is obviously "no", then it becomes clear where the bigotry lies.

Let me get this straight, Cal and Stanford are bigoted because they don't want to be associated with an institution they regard as being bigoted? Your definition of bigotry knows little bounds. I'll provide two analogies.

I don't want to be around people with B.O. Assuming I don't have B.O., my lack of smelliness probably isn't a roadblock to people with B.O. hanging out with me. B.O. is offensive, lack of B.O. is not. I'm not bigoted because I choose not to hang out with people with B.O.

If I choose not to build a 5000 sq ft. home in a mobile home park am I bigoted towards meth addicts and people who don't give a shit about the appearance of their dwelling?

If the church still disallowed blacks from getting the priesthood, would Stanford and Cal still be bigoted against the church if they didn't want to be associated with it? In their minds, discrimination against homosexuals is pretty close to discrimination against minorities. Choosing not to associate with an institution that you regard as being discriminatory due to that institution's established practices/beliefs is not bigotry.

I don't think BYU's failure to get admission to the Pac 10 will be due to the fact that BYU isn't a research university. I think BYU is well-respected enough for what it is as undergraduate school that this isn't much of a hinderance. However, the perceived lack of academic freedom, perception of snake oil research and the church's stance towards homosexuals will be the causes.

byu71
02-11-2010, 01:24 PM
I told you Indy. BYU's opinions come from dumb people

CAl. and Stanfords come from enlightened and smart people.

Stupid people prejudices are bigoted.

Smart peoples prejudices are "enlightened" thought.

P.S. Anyone know. Is the church secretly still keeping blacks from holding the Priesthood. It keeps coming up so I wonder if it is still practiced.

dabrockster
02-11-2010, 01:36 PM
SWEETNESS!!! Going to the Temple tomorrow. This will be added to the prayer list.. ;)

Donuthole
02-11-2010, 01:37 PM
SWEETNESS!!! Going to the Temple tomorrow. This will be added to the prayer list.. ;)
Wow. Be careful what you wish for. Most OSU fans I know are pretty happy with their ability to back into the Rose Bowl year after year after year.

Blueintheface
02-11-2010, 01:42 PM
P.S. Anyone know. Is the church secretly still keeping blacks from holding the Priesthood. It keeps coming up so I wonder if it is still practiced.

I heard it was the alien family that's been living in Roswell for the past half century. They've been baptized but are awaiting full membership until their presence can be revealed when Obama's approval rating dips below 30%.

dabrockster
02-11-2010, 01:56 PM
Wow. Be careful what you wish for. Most OSU fans I know are pretty happy with their ability to back into the Rose Bowl year after year after year.

I am one of those who want better competition and see this as a help to the Big Ten in general to gain respect nationally again..

Jarid in Cedar
02-11-2010, 02:15 PM
When I hear that schools like Stanford and Cal are concerned about the academics at BYU, I don't think student performance, standardized tests, etc. I think about the September 6. Many in entrenced academia viewed that event with great concern, and I think it affects BYU's perception in the academic world far more than not having enough graduate programs, etc.

Indy Coug
02-11-2010, 02:33 PM
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2010/02/11/pac-10-expansion-analyzing-the-options/


I say this as a non-Mormon, USC grad. Excluding BYU from any Pac-10 expansion consideration is nothing less than discrimination for religious purposes. Can one imagine what would happen if the most-highly qualified individual for a job or membership was excluded solely because of religious reasons? West Coast schools may look down their noses at religious institutions, but all those Ph.D.s are also smart enough to know if they exclude BYU from consideration, there are too many independent measurements of excellence to counter their argument.

statman
02-11-2010, 02:37 PM
They are the only conference where an academic argument would fly.

Nope. Academics are important to two other conferences - the PAC-10 and the Big-10. Both have the same type of schools - large research schools with full-service graduate programs, and more research money than athletics money. WAY more. At these schools, academics rules the roost, not athletics. They like to do both, because the both bring fame and dollars to the administrations coffers. But if it came right down to it, if they thought participating in sports would in any way damage thier academic reputation, they'd choose academics over sports - like I said WAY more money there. And that reputation goes on to who they allow in their conference.

On a side notw, it's really not that much of a mystery why a PAC-10 president would be warry of letting an LDS school into their league. If there were a large donor with strong opinions Prop-8, you gotta believe they're telling PAC-10 university presidents "Anyone but BYU..."

SeattleUte
02-11-2010, 02:59 PM
Nope. Academics are important to two other conferences - the PAC-10 and the Big-10. Both have the same type of schools - large research schools with full-service graduate programs, and more research money than athletics money. WAY more. At these schools, academics rules the roost, not athletics. They like to do both, because the both bring fame and dollars to the administrations coffers. But if it came right down to it, if they thought participating in sports would in any way damage thier academic reputation, they'd choose academics over sports - like I said WAY more money there. And that reputation goes on to who they allow in their conference.

On a side notw, it's really not that much of a mystery why a PAC-10 president would be warry of letting an LDS school into their league. If there were a large donor with strong opinions Prop-8, you gotta believe they're telling PAC-10 university presidents "Anyone but BYU..."

http://www.cougaruteforum.com/showpost.php?p=242678&postcount=38