(07-11-2015 04:21 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Texas Tech's AD just came out for expansion...there is an article on the UC board somebody posted. I'm too lazy to link it here.

(07-11-2015 04:21 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Texas Tech's AD just came out for expansion...there is an article on the UC board somebody posted. I'm too lazy to link it here.


edit: http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/07/11/texas-tech-ad-on-big-12-expansion-we-are-financially-stable-competitively-challenged/

(07-11-2015 08:59 AM)BaylorFerg Wrote:  

(07-10-2015 04:59 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(07-10-2015 04:42 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Baylor's biggest liability that it has a tiny little fan base that is spread out all over Texas and that outside of occasional one off events like the Elite 8 vs Duke, their TV ratings are rarely impressive.

But all is not lost Cubbys!

I do honestly believe that the ACC would actively campaign for you once (and if) they get that network off the ground.

That is not Baylor's biggest liability in some circles. The question of academic freedom, legitimate or not, is an issue. If the ACC took just one from Texas and it was not Texas, I suspect the most support would be for TCU. No one in the ACC has a reason to vote against TCU. Baylor has the above issues, and TT is on the other side of the universe.

Past Texas, OU, and Kansas, I think the ACC looks at TCU/ISU/WVa.

You have to mix all the ingredients of the new market footprint, the visibility and historic value of the athletic program, and the final question - how much is ESPN willing to pay?

The above issues are issues for Baylor in the PAC but I don't see how the other religious schools in the ACC would have a problem. Beyond that TCU basketball is not something for the ACC to get excited about like the potential match ups with Baylor. ESPN is apparently happy with Baylor since they are routinely one of 2-3 women's programs to be featured on their 24 hours of basketball and Big Monday's. They also paired up Baylor and Kentucky for the basketball doubleheader at Cowboys Stadium. If the Big 12 blows up I could see Baylor fitting in the ACC or SEC.

(07-11-2015 08:50 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(07-11-2015 08:59 AM)BaylorFerg Wrote:  

(07-10-2015 04:59 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(07-10-2015 04:42 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Baylor's biggest liability that it has a tiny little fan base that is spread out all over Texas and that outside of occasional one off events like the Elite 8 vs Duke, their TV ratings are rarely impressive.

But all is not lost Cubbys!

I do honestly believe that the ACC would actively campaign for you once (and if) they get that network off the ground.

That is not Baylor's biggest liability in some circles. The question of academic freedom, legitimate or not, is an issue. If the ACC took just one from Texas and it was not Texas, I suspect the most support would be for TCU. No one in the ACC has a reason to vote against TCU. Baylor has the above issues, and TT is on the other side of the universe.

Past Texas, OU, and Kansas, I think the ACC looks at TCU/ISU/WVa.

You have to mix all the ingredients of the new market footprint, the visibility and historic value of the athletic program, and the final question - how much is ESPN willing to pay?

The above issues are issues for Baylor in the PAC but I don't see how the other religious schools in the ACC would have a problem. Beyond that TCU basketball is not something for the ACC to get excited about like the potential match ups with Baylor. ESPN is apparently happy with Baylor since they are routinely one of 2-3 women's programs to be featured on their 24 hours of basketball and Big Monday's. They also paired up Baylor and Kentucky for the basketball doubleheader at Cowboys Stadium. If the Big 12 blows up I could see Baylor fitting in the ACC or SEC.

This is the source of the more liberal ACC schools' problem with Baylor - it's from the Baptist Convention which appoints 25% of Baylor's board, with the other 75% appointed from the board:

The cause of education in the Kingdom of Christ is co-ordinate with the causes of missions and general
benevolence, and should receive along with these the liberal support of the churches. An adequate system of
Christian schools is necessary to a complete spiritual program for Christ’s people.
In Christian education there should be a proper balance between academic freedom and academic
responsibility. Freedom in any orderly relationship of human life is always limited and never absolute. The
freedom of a teacher in a Christian school, college, or seminary is limited by the pre-eminence of Jesus Christ, by
the authoritative nature of the Scriptures, and by the distinct purpose for which the school exists.

Baylor would present a potential inside political issue for Duke, UNC, UVa, Pitt, Syracuse, NCSU, and VT. Stanford's stance against Baylor would be shared by several in the ACC. It's not about religion per se, as it is governance and the ability at any moment for the Board to pull a professor out of the classroom or stop his or her research.

(07-11-2015 08:59 AM)BaylorFerg Wrote:  

(07-10-2015 04:59 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(07-10-2015 04:42 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Baylor's biggest liability that it has a tiny little fan base that is spread out all over Texas and that outside of occasional one off events like the Elite 8 vs Duke, their TV ratings are rarely impressive.

But all is not lost Cubbys!

I do honestly believe that the ACC would actively campaign for you once (and if) they get that network off the ground.

That is not Baylor's biggest liability in some circles. The question of academic freedom, legitimate or not, is an issue. If the ACC took just one from Texas and it was not Texas, I suspect the most support would be for TCU. No one in the ACC has a reason to vote against TCU. Baylor has the above issues, and TT is on the other side of the universe.

Past Texas, OU, and Kansas, I think the ACC looks at TCU/ISU/WVa.

You have to mix all the ingredients of the new market footprint, the visibility and historic value of the athletic program, and the final question - how much is ESPN willing to pay?

The above issues are issues for Baylor in the PAC but I don't see how the other religious schools in the ACC would have a problem. Beyond that TCU basketball is not something for the ACC to get excited about like the potential match ups with Baylor. ESPN is apparently happy with Baylor since they are routinely one of 2-3 women's programs to be featured on their 24 hours of basketball and Big Monday's. They also paired up Baylor and Kentucky for the basketball doubleheader at Cowboys Stadium. If the Big 12 blows up I could see Baylor fitting in the ACC or SEC.

(07-11-2015 04:21 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Texas Tech's AD just came out for expansion...there is an article on the UC board somebody posted. I'm too lazy to link it here.


edit: http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/07/11/texas-tech-ad-on-big-12-expansion-we-are-financially-stable-competitively-challenged/

(07-11-2015 10:13 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-11-2015 08:50 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(07-11-2015 08:59 AM)BaylorFerg Wrote:  

(07-10-2015 04:59 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(07-10-2015 04:42 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Baylor's biggest liability that it has a tiny little fan base that is spread out all over Texas and that outside of occasional one off events like the Elite 8 vs Duke, their TV ratings are rarely impressive.

But all is not lost Cubbys!

I do honestly believe that the ACC would actively campaign for you once (and if) they get that network off the ground.

That is not Baylor's biggest liability in some circles. The question of academic freedom, legitimate or not, is an issue. If the ACC took just one from Texas and it was not Texas, I suspect the most support would be for TCU. No one in the ACC has a reason to vote against TCU. Baylor has the above issues, and TT is on the other side of the universe.

Past Texas, OU, and Kansas, I think the ACC looks at TCU/ISU/WVa.

You have to mix all the ingredients of the new market footprint, the visibility and historic value of the athletic program, and the final question - how much is ESPN willing to pay?

The above issues are issues for Baylor in the PAC but I don't see how the other religious schools in the ACC would have a problem. Beyond that TCU basketball is not something for the ACC to get excited about like the potential match ups with Baylor. ESPN is apparently happy with Baylor since they are routinely one of 2-3 women's programs to be featured on their 24 hours of basketball and Big Monday's. They also paired up Baylor and Kentucky for the basketball doubleheader at Cowboys Stadium. If the Big 12 blows up I could see Baylor fitting in the ACC or SEC.

This is the source of the more liberal ACC schools' problem with Baylor - it's from the Baptist Convention which appoints 25% of Baylor's board, with the other 75% appointed from the board:

The cause of education in the Kingdom of Christ is co-ordinate with the causes of missions and general
benevolence, and should receive along with these the liberal support of the churches. An adequate system of
Christian schools is necessary to a complete spiritual program for Christ’s people.
In Christian education there should be a proper balance between academic freedom and academic
responsibility. Freedom in any orderly relationship of human life is always limited and never absolute. The
freedom of a teacher in a Christian school, college, or seminary is limited by the pre-eminence of Jesus Christ, by
the authoritative nature of the Scriptures, and by the distinct purpose for which the school exists.

Baylor would present a potential inside political issue for Duke, UNC, UVa, Pitt, Syracuse, NCSU, and VT. Stanford's stance against Baylor would be shared by several in the ACC. It's not about religion per se, as it is governance and the ability at any moment for the Board to pull a professor out of the classroom or stop his or her research.

I guess the ACC would have to kick out Wake Forest, a Baptist school. And don't forget BC, a Catholic school. And, of course, Duke, which is affiliated with the United Methodist Church and has one of the most prominent Methodist seminaries in the country (and what I found says that 2/3 of Duke's board is appointed by UMC conferences).

(07-11-2015 10:13 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-11-2015 08:50 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(07-11-2015 08:59 AM)BaylorFerg Wrote:  

(07-10-2015 04:59 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(07-10-2015 04:42 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Baylor's biggest liability that it has a tiny little fan base that is spread out all over Texas and that outside of occasional one off events like the Elite 8 vs Duke, their TV ratings are rarely impressive.

But all is not lost Cubbys!

I do honestly believe that the ACC would actively campaign for you once (and if) they get that network off the ground.

That is not Baylor's biggest liability in some circles. The question of academic freedom, legitimate or not, is an issue. If the ACC took just one from Texas and it was not Texas, I suspect the most support would be for TCU. No one in the ACC has a reason to vote against TCU. Baylor has the above issues, and TT is on the other side of the universe.

Past Texas, OU, and Kansas, I think the ACC looks at TCU/ISU/WVa.

You have to mix all the ingredients of the new market footprint, the visibility and historic value of the athletic program, and the final question - how much is ESPN willing to pay?

The above issues are issues for Baylor in the PAC but I don't see how the other religious schools in the ACC would have a problem. Beyond that TCU basketball is not something for the ACC to get excited about like the potential match ups with Baylor. ESPN is apparently happy with Baylor since they are routinely one of 2-3 women's programs to be featured on their 24 hours of basketball and Big Monday's. They also paired up Baylor and Kentucky for the basketball doubleheader at Cowboys Stadium. If the Big 12 blows up I could see Baylor fitting in the ACC or SEC.

This is the source of the more liberal ACC schools' problem with Baylor - it's from the Baptist Convention which appoints 25% of Baylor's board, with the other 75% appointed from the board:

The cause of education in the Kingdom of Christ is co-ordinate with the causes of missions and general
benevolence, and should receive along with these the liberal support of the churches. An adequate system of
Christian schools is necessary to a complete spiritual program for Christ’s people.
In Christian education there should be a proper balance between academic freedom and academic
responsibility. Freedom in any orderly relationship of human life is always limited and never absolute. The
freedom of a teacher in a Christian school, college, or seminary is limited by the pre-eminence of Jesus Christ, by
the authoritative nature of the Scriptures, and by the distinct purpose for which the school exists.

Baylor would present a potential inside political issue for Duke, UNC, UVa, Pitt, Syracuse, NCSU, and VT. Stanford's stance against Baylor would be shared by several in the ACC. It's not about religion per se, as it is governance and the ability at any moment for the Board to pull a professor out of the classroom or stop his or her research.

I guess the ACC would have to kick out Wake Forest, a Baptist school. And don't forget BC, a Catholic school. And, of course, Duke, which is affiliated with the United Methodist Church and has one of the most prominent Methodist seminaries in the country (and what I found says that 2/3 of Duke's board is appointed by UMC conferences).

(07-12-2015 12:54 AM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(07-11-2015 10:13 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-11-2015 08:50 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(07-11-2015 08:59 AM)BaylorFerg Wrote:  

(07-10-2015 04:59 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  That is not Baylor's biggest liability in some circles. The question of academic freedom, legitimate or not, is an issue. If the ACC took just one from Texas and it was not Texas, I suspect the most support would be for TCU. No one in the ACC has a reason to vote against TCU. Baylor has the above issues, and TT is on the other side of the universe.

Past Texas, OU, and Kansas, I think the ACC looks at TCU/ISU/WVa.

You have to mix all the ingredients of the new market footprint, the visibility and historic value of the athletic program, and the final question - how much is ESPN willing to pay?

The above issues are issues for Baylor in the PAC but I don't see how the other religious schools in the ACC would have a problem. Beyond that TCU basketball is not something for the ACC to get excited about like the potential match ups with Baylor. ESPN is apparently happy with Baylor since they are routinely one of 2-3 women's programs to be featured on their 24 hours of basketball and Big Monday's. They also paired up Baylor and Kentucky for the basketball doubleheader at Cowboys Stadium. If the Big 12 blows up I could see Baylor fitting in the ACC or SEC.

This is the source of the more liberal ACC schools' problem with Baylor - it's from the Baptist Convention which appoints 25% of Baylor's board, with the other 75% appointed from the board:

The cause of education in the Kingdom of Christ is co-ordinate with the causes of missions and general
benevolence, and should receive along with these the liberal support of the churches. An adequate system of
Christian schools is necessary to a complete spiritual program for Christ’s people.
In Christian education there should be a proper balance between academic freedom and academic
responsibility. Freedom in any orderly relationship of human life is always limited and never absolute. The
freedom of a teacher in a Christian school, college, or seminary is limited by the pre-eminence of Jesus Christ, by
the authoritative nature of the Scriptures, and by the distinct purpose for which the school exists.

Baylor would present a potential inside political issue for Duke, UNC, UVa, Pitt, Syracuse, NCSU, and VT. Stanford's stance against Baylor would be shared by several in the ACC. It's not about religion per se, as it is governance and the ability at any moment for the Board to pull a professor out of the classroom or stop his or her research.

I guess the ACC would have to kick out Wake Forest, a Baptist school. And don't forget BC, a Catholic school. And, of course, Duke, which is affiliated with the United Methodist Church and has one of the most prominent Methodist seminaries in the country (and what I found says that 2/3 of Duke's board is appointed by UMC conferences).

You are missing the point and since I am a Methodist who lives in NC I know a little something about Duke. Here is Duke's mission statement:

“To these ends, the mission of Duke University is to provide a superior liberal education to undergraduate students, attending not only to their intellectual growth but also to their development as adults committed to high ethical standards and full participation as leaders in their communities; to prepare future members of the learned professions for lives of skilled and ethical service by providing excellent graduate and professional education; to advance the frontiers of knowledge and contribute boldly to the international community of scholarship; to promote an intellectual environment built on a commitment to free and open inquiry; to help those who suffer, cure disease, and promote health, through sophisticated medical research and thoughtful patient care; to provide wide ranging educational opportunities, on and beyond our campuses, for traditional students, active professionals and life-long learners using the power of information technologies; and to promote a deep appreciation for the range of human difference and potential, a sense of the obligations and rewards of citizenship, and a commitment to learning, freedom and truth.

Having a seminary does not mean your university is under a religious sect's thumb and that you are operating under a set of bylaws that explicitly states that the prevailing religion trumps academic inquiry and expression. I'm not saying that Baylor is Bob Jones or Liberty U, but they are just a generation removed from that and the faculty and students at the ACC's more liberal institutions will not be happy.

(07-11-2015 04:30 PM)BE4evah Wrote:  

(07-11-2015 04:21 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Texas Tech's AD just came out for expansion...there is an article on the UC board somebody posted. I'm too lazy to link it here.

I'll leave it at this: I've heard that OU does not view Texas Tech as having the same enthusiasm as Oklahoma for ideas that the Sooners view as important to OU. The AD of Texas Tech, without knowing what he said, may stand differentiated from the Texas Tech president, but I have suspicions that that is not the case...and those suspicions will become apparent very quickly...

Impolitic to say that OU views Texas Tech as a mere gnat buzzing with great ferocity, but still a gnat? Sure. But that doesn't make it untrue.

(07-12-2015 01:02 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(07-12-2015 12:54 AM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(07-11-2015 10:13 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-11-2015 08:50 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(07-11-2015 08:59 AM)BaylorFerg Wrote:  The above issues are issues for Baylor in the PAC but I don't see how the other religious schools in the ACC would have a problem. Beyond that TCU basketball is not something for the ACC to get excited about like the potential match ups with Baylor. ESPN is apparently happy with Baylor since they are routinely one of 2-3 women's programs to be featured on their 24 hours of basketball and Big Monday's. They also paired up Baylor and Kentucky for the basketball doubleheader at Cowboys Stadium. If the Big 12 blows up I could see Baylor fitting in the ACC or SEC.

This is the source of the more liberal ACC schools' problem with Baylor - it's from the Baptist Convention which appoints 25% of Baylor's board, with the other 75% appointed from the board:

The cause of education in the Kingdom of Christ is co-ordinate with the causes of missions and general
benevolence, and should receive along with these the liberal support of the churches. An adequate system of
Christian schools is necessary to a complete spiritual program for Christ’s people.
In Christian education there should be a proper balance between academic freedom and academic
responsibility. Freedom in any orderly relationship of human life is always limited and never absolute. The
freedom of a teacher in a Christian school, college, or seminary is limited by the pre-eminence of Jesus Christ, by
the authoritative nature of the Scriptures, and by the distinct purpose for which the school exists.

Baylor would present a potential inside political issue for Duke, UNC, UVa, Pitt, Syracuse, NCSU, and VT. Stanford's stance against Baylor would be shared by several in the ACC. It's not about religion per se, as it is governance and the ability at any moment for the Board to pull a professor out of the classroom or stop his or her research.

I guess the ACC would have to kick out Wake Forest, a Baptist school. And don't forget BC, a Catholic school. And, of course, Duke, which is affiliated with the United Methodist Church and has one of the most prominent Methodist seminaries in the country (and what I found says that 2/3 of Duke's board is appointed by UMC conferences).

You are missing the point and since I am a Methodist who lives in NC I know a little something about Duke. Here is Duke's mission statement:

“To these ends, the mission of Duke University is to provide a superior liberal education to undergraduate students, attending not only to their intellectual growth but also to their development as adults committed to high ethical standards and full participation as leaders in their communities; to prepare future members of the learned professions for lives of skilled and ethical service by providing excellent graduate and professional education; to advance the frontiers of knowledge and contribute boldly to the international community of scholarship; to promote an intellectual environment built on a commitment to free and open inquiry; to help those who suffer, cure disease, and promote health, through sophisticated medical research and thoughtful patient care; to provide wide ranging educational opportunities, on and beyond our campuses, for traditional students, active professionals and life-long learners using the power of information technologies; and to promote a deep appreciation for the range of human difference and potential, a sense of the obligations and rewards of citizenship, and a commitment to learning, freedom and truth.

Having a seminary does not mean your university is under a religious sect's thumb and that you are operating under a set of bylaws that explicitly states that the prevailing religion trumps academic inquiry and expression. I'm not saying that Baylor is Bob Jones or Liberty U, but they are just a generation removed from that and the faculty and students at the ACC's more liberal institutions will not be happy.

My late uncle was a Methodist preacher who taught at some of the Methodists universities like West Virginia Wesleyan. Methodists are more Liberal minded than the Baptists are. I attended church to both of them. I found Methodists taught to love people for who they are no matter who they are. But some Baptist Preachers do taught hate for others. Like the founder of Liberty U, and with Oral Roberts. So, it depends who forces you to attend to church and all that. I got a letter from the Ozarks College in Branson that they would accept me, but I found that they are strict on you to attend mass and all that. So, I think SMU like all other Methodist universities are more free to do what you do to learn than other Religious Affiliations. The players at BYU have to go overseas to spread the message before and after they play.

(07-12-2015 07:59 AM)bullet Wrote:  Actually, the OU, WVU, TCU and TT officials have all said the same thing. "We are in favor of expansion with the right schools." The only real difference has been the emphasis on "in favor of" or "right schools."

Quote:All of you are just displaying your bias against Baptists. There are no academic freedom issues at Baylor anymore than at SMU or Duke or Emory. People in responsible positions know that.

Quote:Baylor University is an institution of higher education controlled by an all-Baptist Board of Regents and is operated within the Christian- oriented aims and ideals of Baptists. It is affiliated with the Baptist General Convention of Texas, a cooperative association of autonomous Texas
Baptist churches. Therefore, a member of its faculty is expected to be in sympathy with the University's primary objective - to educate its students within the framework of a Christian culture. The rights and privileges of the instructor should, therefore, be exercised with discretion and a sense of loyalty to the supporting institution

(07-12-2015 08:09 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  

Quote:All of you are just displaying your bias against Baptists. There are no academic freedom issues at Baylor anymore than at SMU or Duke or Emory. People in responsible positions know that.

Facts.

1) Baylor is still actively tied to its founding religious institution and retains its religious mission. From Baylor's own academic freedom statement:

Quote:Baylor University is an institution of higher education controlled by an all-Baptist Board of Regents and is operated within the Christian- oriented aims and ideals of Baptists. It is affiliated with the Baptist General Convention of Texas, a cooperative association of autonomous Texas
Baptist churches. Therefore, a member of its faculty is expected to be in sympathy with the University's primary objective - to educate its students within the framework of a Christian culture. The rights and privileges of the instructor should, therefore, be exercised with discretion and a sense of loyalty to the supporting institution

Now, whether you cubs like it or not, "People in responsible positions" in all the other power conferences that are trying to improve their academic standings see that statement as an admission of being a school with an ACTIVE religious mission that can and will censor academic inquiry.

2) Tabling the academic freedom issue, Baylor is also not a research oriented school but a teaching oriented school. The amount of money Baylor spends on research compared to peers and public schools in the P5 is peanuts. And again, whether you cubs like it or not, thats a black mark against you because school presidents make the decision to expand and they want peer research institutions.

(07-12-2015 08:08 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(07-12-2015 07:59 AM)bullet Wrote:  Actually, the OU, WVU, TCU and TT officials have all said the same thing. "We are in favor of expansion with the right schools." The only real difference has been the emphasis on "in favor of" or "right schools."

Has anyone from Texas actually made a public comment since Boren's?