Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Thread Closed 
SBC talked to Liberty
Author Message
CommuterBob Offline
Head Tailgater
*

Posts: 5,840
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation: 173
I Root For: UCF, Ohio State
Location:
Post: #1
SBC talked to Liberty
But no invitation.

Quote:Tim Buckley ‏@TDARaginCajuns 44m
Commish Karl Benson: The Sun Belt has been in talks with Liberty regarding possible membership bid, but no invite extended.
05-22-2013 12:45 PM
Find all posts by this user
Advertisement


cleburneslim Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,551
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 25
I Root For: jax state
Location:
Post: #2
RE: SBC talked to Liberty
Maybe they said no also.
05-23-2013 06:45 AM
Find all posts by this user
LUcanesfan Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 184
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 7
I Root For: Flames / Canes
Location: DMV
Post: #3
RE: SBC talked to Liberty
Liberty does not have the votes... The Sun Belt would rather wait to see if any other prospects become available first. The problem is JMU is not truly interested in joining because of the Sun Belt's reputation and will keep giving Benson and the Sun Belt presidents the runaround. Missouri State may be interested but they're still not ready... Bottom line: I think this time next year we'll still hear the same story - school X and school Y are not ready yet, so therefore we'll wait until they develop.
05-23-2013 06:46 AM
Find all posts by this user
Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,616
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation: 141
I Root For: Collar Popping
Location:
Post: #4
RE: SBC talked to Liberty
(05-23-2013 06:45 AM)cleburneslim Wrote:  Maybe they said no also.

LOL!

.
05-23-2013 06:59 AM
Find all posts by this user
hapapp Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 852
Joined: Jan 2003
Reputation: 73
I Root For: App State
Location: Rocky Mount, VA
Post: #5
RE: SBC talked to Liberty
(05-23-2013 06:59 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  
(05-23-2013 06:45 AM)cleburneslim Wrote:  Maybe they said no also.

LOL!

.

Liberty is dead set on moving up and they have one chance. They aren't saying no to any conference that offers them a spot.
05-23-2013 11:31 AM
Find all posts by this user
OrangeCrush22 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,426
Joined: Feb 2011
Reputation: 267
I Root For: Syracuse
Location:
Post: #6
RE: SBC talked to Liberty
They'll get an invite when they become a real academic institution. As long as they continue to "teach" creationism, they'll be left behind.
05-23-2013 11:48 AM
Find all posts by this user
Advertisement


GoApps70 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 20,650
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation: 290
I Root For: Appalachian St.
Location: Charlotte, N. C.
Post: #7
RE: SBC talked to Liberty
Some LU posters indicated they may put their hopes on getting a MAC bid now.
05-23-2013 01:49 PM
Find all posts by this user
LUcanesfan Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 184
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 7
I Root For: Flames / Canes
Location: DMV
Post: #8
RE: SBC talked to Liberty
(05-23-2013 01:49 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Some LU posters indicated they may put their hopes on getting a MAC bid now.

As much as I would like to see Liberty in the MAC, I think the MAC may look at JMU, Delaware (if they decide to move up), Northern Iowa, and maybe even Missouri State (when they become FBS ready). All of them, including Liberty, are within the MAC's footprint.

If Stony Brook ever get their stadium up to par, they would be considered a great candidate (great academics, good football, baseball, and basketball (as of late)).
05-23-2013 02:07 PM
Find all posts by this user
BruceMcF Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,107
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 763
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #9
RE: SBC talked to Liberty
(05-23-2013 01:49 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Some LU posters indicated they may put their hopes on getting a MAC bid now.
They shouldn't rest their hopes in the MAC ... the MAC will stay at 13 indefinitely if Liberty is the only option for expanding to 14.
05-23-2013 02:31 PM
Find all posts by this user
Theodoresdaddy Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,577
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 48
I Root For: WVU; Marshall
Location: WV
Post: #10
RE: SBC talked to Liberty
(05-23-2013 01:49 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Some LU posters indicated they may put their hopes on getting a MAC bid now.

03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao

good luck with that
05-24-2013 01:01 AM
Find all posts by this user
Theodoresdaddy Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,577
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 48
I Root For: WVU; Marshall
Location: WV
Post: #11
RE: SBC talked to Liberty
(05-23-2013 11:48 AM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  They'll get an invite when they become a real academic institution. As long as they continue to "teach" creationism, they'll be left behind.

+1
05-24-2013 01:03 AM
Find all posts by this user
Advertisement


Tom in Lazybrook Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,299
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 446
I Root For: So Alabama, GWU
Location: Houston
Post: #12
RE: SBC talked to Liberty
Its obvious at this point that there is significant opposition to Liberty's inclusion by the existing members of the Sun Belt Conference. The opposition is likely related to the following:

1) Liberty's actions. They discriminate in employment against persons on the basis of religion and sexual orientation. They may have a legal right to do so, but that doesn't mean that the institutions of the Belt have to sustain such discrimination by providing Liberty with a benefit as they continue to discriminate. The school continues to retain, at very high levels within the institution (including the Dean of the Liberty University Law School), persons that engage in advocacy and rhetoric considered to be deeply offensive to wide segments of the American population and that does not comport with any IMHO mainstream understanding of Christianity.

2) Liberty's reputation. Heavily influenced by Liberty actions, as well as Liberty's long (and continuing) history of unconventional statements and academic practices, has caused Liberty to have a richly earned reputation for bigotry and bizzare academics. Liberty's reputation is so toxic that their inclusion in the Belt today would likely cause other potential members of the Belt to run for the hills. In other words, if the Belt let Liberty in, very few schools would ever join us in the future, thus eliminating candidates for future expansion (which the Belt may need in the future).

The fact that Liberty is outside the normal footprint is apparently less of a concern (they took Idaho). As is Liberty's poor record in FCS (they looked at everyone else in FCS). Really, it comes down to a fit issue. Liberty doesn't fit in the Sun Belt due to Liberty's actions, rhetoric, policies, and institutional organization (private school and dynastic leadership).

Not all members of the Liberty community support the continuing actions of the administration. However, the Belt has to look at the leadership of the school, which appears to be fully committed to furthering Liberty's richly deserved reputation for discrimination, human rights abuse advocacy/defense, adherence to unconventional academic standards, and extremely offensive rhetoric.
(This post was last modified: 05-24-2013 10:14 AM by Tom in Lazybrook.)
05-24-2013 10:12 AM
Find all posts by this user
MU88 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,231
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 52
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #13
RE: SBC talked to Liberty
(05-24-2013 10:12 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Its obvious at this point that there is significant opposition to Liberty's inclusion by the existing members of the Sun Belt Conference. The opposition is likely related to the following:

1) Liberty's actions. They discriminate in employment against persons on the basis of religion and sexual orientation. They may have a legal right to do so, but that doesn't mean that the institutions of the Belt have to sustain such discrimination by providing Liberty with a benefit as they continue to discriminate. The school continues to retain, at very high levels within the institution (including the Dean of the Liberty University Law School), persons that engage in advocacy and rhetoric considered to be deeply offensive to wide segments of the American population and that does not comport with any IMHO mainstream understanding of Christianity.

2) Liberty's reputation. Heavily influenced by Liberty actions, as well as Liberty's long (and continuing) history of unconventional statements and academic practices, has caused Liberty to have a richly earned reputation for bigotry and bizzare academics. Liberty's reputation is so toxic that their inclusion in the Belt today would likely cause other potential members of the Belt to run for the hills. In other words, if the Belt let Liberty in, very few schools would ever join us in the future, thus eliminating candidates for future expansion (which the Belt may need in the future).

The fact that Liberty is outside the normal footprint is apparently less of a concern (they took Idaho). As is Liberty's poor record in FCS (they looked at everyone else in FCS). Really, it comes down to a fit issue. Liberty doesn't fit in the Sun Belt due to Liberty's actions, rhetoric, policies, and institutional organization (private school and dynastic leadership).

Not all members of the Liberty community support the continuing actions of the administration. However, the Belt has to look at the leadership of the school, which appears to be fully committed to furthering Liberty's richly deserved reputation for discrimination, human rights abuse advocacy/defense, adherence to unconventional academic standards, and extremely offensive rhetoric.

I don't believe in many of the beliefs that Liberty supports. But, they should be free to express them without discrimination. However, while you spout off about as being for free speech and anti-discrimination, your views are are clearly discriminatory towards Liberty and their beliefs. That's the problem with most free speech advocates, they only support free speech if agrees with their point of view. Say something anti-Islam and you are a bigot. Say something anti-Christian or Mormon and no one pays attention. We can have anti-Mormon or Catholic plays on Broadway and they are critically acclaimed. Imagine the reaction from an anti-Islam play? Would you be just as accepting or would you find it offensive?

The criteria for admitting Liberty or any other school in a conference should depend on whether their athletic department is a good fit for the conference. If their Christian beliefs, e.g. not playing on Sunday, renders the school incompatible, so be it. But to advocate rejecting a school simply because their administration maintains certain religious beliefs that conflict with your accepted view of what Christians should believe, in my opinion, also conflicts with beliefs you are advocating on so many levels.
05-24-2013 11:24 AM
Find all posts by this user
hapapp Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 852
Joined: Jan 2003
Reputation: 73
I Root For: App State
Location: Rocky Mount, VA
Post: #14
RE: SBC talked to Liberty
(05-24-2013 11:24 AM)MU88 Wrote:  
(05-24-2013 10:12 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Its obvious at this point that there is significant opposition to Liberty's inclusion by the existing members of the Sun Belt Conference. The opposition is likely related to the following:

1) Liberty's actions. They discriminate in employment against persons on the basis of religion and sexual orientation. They may have a legal right to do so, but that doesn't mean that the institutions of the Belt have to sustain such discrimination by providing Liberty with a benefit as they continue to discriminate. The school continues to retain, at very high levels within the institution (including the Dean of the Liberty University Law School), persons that engage in advocacy and rhetoric considered to be deeply offensive to wide segments of the American population and that does not comport with any IMHO mainstream understanding of Christianity.

2) Liberty's reputation. Heavily influenced by Liberty actions, as well as Liberty's long (and continuing) history of unconventional statements and academic practices, has caused Liberty to have a richly earned reputation for bigotry and bizzare academics. Liberty's reputation is so toxic that their inclusion in the Belt today would likely cause other potential members of the Belt to run for the hills. In other words, if the Belt let Liberty in, very few schools would ever join us in the future, thus eliminating candidates for future expansion (which the Belt may need in the future).

The fact that Liberty is outside the normal footprint is apparently less of a concern (they took Idaho). As is Liberty's poor record in FCS (they looked at everyone else in FCS). Really, it comes down to a fit issue. Liberty doesn't fit in the Sun Belt due to Liberty's actions, rhetoric, policies, and institutional organization (private school and dynastic leadership).

Not all members of the Liberty community support the continuing actions of the administration. However, the Belt has to look at the leadership of the school, which appears to be fully committed to furthering Liberty's richly deserved reputation for discrimination, human rights abuse advocacy/defense, adherence to unconventional academic standards, and extremely offensive rhetoric.

I don't believe in many of the beliefs that Liberty supports. But, they should be free to express them without discrimination. However, while you spout off about as being for free speech and anti-discrimination, your views are are clearly discriminatory towards Liberty and their beliefs. That's the problem with most free speech advocates, they only support free speech if agrees with their point of view. Say something anti-Islam and you are a bigot. Say something anti-Christian or Mormon and no one pays attention. We can have anti-Mormon or Catholic plays on Broadway and they are critically acclaimed. Imagine the reaction from an anti-Islam play? Would you be just as accepting or would you find it offensive?

The criteria for admitting Liberty or any other school in a conference should depend on whether their athletic department is a good fit for the conference. If their Christian beliefs, e.g. not playing on Sunday, renders the school incompatible, so be it. But to advocate rejecting a school simply because their administration maintains certain religious beliefs that conflict with your accepted view of what Christians should believe, in my opinion, also conflicts with beliefs you are advocating on so many levels.

Liberty is free to believe and teach whatever they choose. It doesn't violate free speech to openly disagree with them. No school has a constitutional right to belong to a conference. It is not discrimination to reject a school because its mission doesn't mesh with the rest of the schools in a conference. If I recall the Big 10 has had a policy of only accepting schools which belong to a certain select academic group.
05-24-2013 11:43 AM
Find all posts by this user
blunderbuss Offline
Banned

Posts: 19,649
Joined: Apr 2011
I Root For: ECU & the CSA
Location: Buzz City, NC
Post: #15
RE: SBC talked to Liberty
(05-24-2013 11:24 AM)MU88 Wrote:  
(05-24-2013 10:12 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Its obvious at this point that there is significant opposition to Liberty's inclusion by the existing members of the Sun Belt Conference. The opposition is likely related to the following:

1) Liberty's actions. They discriminate in employment against persons on the basis of religion and sexual orientation. They may have a legal right to do so, but that doesn't mean that the institutions of the Belt have to sustain such discrimination by providing Liberty with a benefit as they continue to discriminate. The school continues to retain, at very high levels within the institution (including the Dean of the Liberty University Law School), persons that engage in advocacy and rhetoric considered to be deeply offensive to wide segments of the American population and that does not comport with any IMHO mainstream understanding of Christianity.

2) Liberty's reputation. Heavily influenced by Liberty actions, as well as Liberty's long (and continuing) history of unconventional statements and academic practices, has caused Liberty to have a richly earned reputation for bigotry and bizzare academics. Liberty's reputation is so toxic that their inclusion in the Belt today would likely cause other potential members of the Belt to run for the hills. In other words, if the Belt let Liberty in, very few schools would ever join us in the future, thus eliminating candidates for future expansion (which the Belt may need in the future).

The fact that Liberty is outside the normal footprint is apparently less of a concern (they took Idaho). As is Liberty's poor record in FCS (they looked at everyone else in FCS). Really, it comes down to a fit issue. Liberty doesn't fit in the Sun Belt due to Liberty's actions, rhetoric, policies, and institutional organization (private school and dynastic leadership).

Not all members of the Liberty community support the continuing actions of the administration. However, the Belt has to look at the leadership of the school, which appears to be fully committed to furthering Liberty's richly deserved reputation for discrimination, human rights abuse advocacy/defense, adherence to unconventional academic standards, and extremely offensive rhetoric.

I don't believe in many of the beliefs that Liberty supports. But, they should be free to express them without discrimination. However, while you spout off about as being for free speech and anti-discrimination, your views are are clearly discriminatory towards Liberty and their beliefs. That's the problem with most free speech advocates, they only support free speech if agrees with their point of view. Say something anti-Islam and you are a bigot. Say something anti-Christian or Mormon and no one pays attention. We can have anti-Mormon or Catholic plays on Broadway and they are critically acclaimed. Imagine the reaction from an anti-Islam play? Would you be just as accepting or would you find it offensive?

The criteria for admitting Liberty or any other school in a conference should depend on whether their athletic department is a good fit for the conference. If their Christian beliefs, e.g. not playing on Sunday, renders the school incompatible, so be it. But to advocate rejecting a school simply because their administration maintains certain religious beliefs that conflict with your accepted view of what Christians should believe, in my opinion, also conflicts with beliefs you are advocating on so many levels.

Very well said. Many times people confuse their personal beliefs and feelings with "rights". The fact of the matter is LU has the right to teach however they wish and clearly people buy into / agree with it or they wouldn't have so much growth recently.
05-24-2013 12:16 PM
Find all posts by this user
BruceMcF Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,107
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 763
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #16
RE: SBC talked to Liberty
(05-24-2013 11:24 AM)MU88 Wrote:  I don't believe in many of the beliefs that Liberty supports. But, they should be free to express them without discrimination. However, while you spout off about as being for free speech and anti-discrimination, your views are are clearly discriminatory towards Liberty and their beliefs.
Voluntary membership associations are free to prefer not to associate with schools that practice religious and other discrimination. Yes, that practice is itself "discrimination" in the generic meaning of exercising judgement, but not discrimination in the sense of discrimination on the basis of something that shouldn't be taken into account.

So, if someone is applying for a job of bus driver, you generally shouldn't take their religion into account. If it is, on the other hand, a religion that forbids them from driving, the fact that their religious beliefs prevent them from performing the job actually is relevant. This is the "Amish Bus Driver" rule.

This has nothing to do with freedom of speech, which is restriction on the government taking action against you based on what you say, with certain narrowly bound exceptions (eg, yelling "Fire" in a crowded movie theater).

(05-24-2013 11:24 AM)MU88 Wrote:  The criteria for admitting Liberty or any other school in a conference should depend on whether their athletic department is a good fit for the conference.
Why? Its a voluntary membership organization, the criteria for admitting Liberty or any other schools in a conference should depend on whatever the current full voting members of the conference want to take into account. If they, for example, do not share the Big Ten's obsession with research performance and grad school status, but do value undergraduate education, that would be ample reason to set Liberty to one side. If they are institutions that agree on non-discrimination on religious or gender orientation grounds, and don't want to admit an actively discriminatory institution, that's well within their rights.
(This post was last modified: 05-24-2013 12:31 PM by BruceMcF.)
05-24-2013 12:24 PM
Find all posts by this user
Advertisement


GoApps70 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 20,650
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation: 290
I Root For: Appalachian St.
Location: Charlotte, N. C.
Post: #17
RE: SBC talked to Liberty
If the MAC needs another member and likes Liberty University, why not take them into the conference right away.
05-24-2013 12:45 PM
Find all posts by this user
nzmorange Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,000
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 279
I Root For: UAB
Location:
Post: #18
RE: SBC talked to Liberty
(05-24-2013 12:45 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  If the MAC needs another member and likes Liberty University, why not take them into the conference right away.

I'm not sure that's the case, but if it was the case, then I would imagine that they would.


Btw, I think that the U of Vermont is the highest university east of the Rockies 03-lmfao
05-24-2013 12:49 PM
Find all posts by this user
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #19
RE: SBC talked to Liberty
The beliefs and actions of an academic institution clearly impact whether the institution is one that other members wish to affiliate with.

If you look at attendance, success, and commitment to athletics, BYU is a no-brainer selection for Big XII and Pac-12, but neither ever pulled the trigger to invite the Cougars. Being passed over by the P12 played a major role in their decision to go independent when rival Utah was selected.

BYU is a fantastic fit for the P12 athletically, but they don't fit culturally as an institution and thus they've seen two lesser supported programs take "their" spot in the league.
05-24-2013 12:58 PM
Find all posts by this user
GoApps70 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 20,650
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation: 290
I Root For: Appalachian St.
Location: Charlotte, N. C.
Post: #20
RE: SBC talked to Liberty
(05-24-2013 12:49 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(05-24-2013 12:45 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  If the MAC needs another member and likes Liberty University, why not take them into the conference right away.

I'm not sure that's the case, but if it was the case, then I would imagine that they would.


Btw, I think that the U of Vermont is the highest university east of the Rockies 03-lmfao
Considering that Appalachian State is Over 3,000 feet higher, you must be talking about something other than altitude.
Additionally some of the mountain peaks near Boone are the highest East of the Rockies. That's one reason there are so
many ski slopes around App State.

Surprised the MAC has not grabbed Liberty up already.
(This post was last modified: 05-24-2013 01:02 PM by GoApps70.)
05-24-2013 12:58 PM
Find all posts by this user
Thread Closed 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.