(06-06-2015 10:03 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(06-06-2015 09:25 PM)knucklehead Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 09:35 PM)ARSTATEFAN1986 Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 09:34 PM)Usajags Wrote:  Why the sudden interest in CCU, did they announce they wanted to move up or did everyone just jump on that bandwagon for some reason???

There may be more interest in Coastal Carolina.

Small stadium and low fan support for CCU, so sure why not. They'd have to build on and bus folks from afar.

We've heard this opinion. Don't need to hear it again

Didn't read all 16 pages. Sorry.

The absolute truth is that Liberty is the most move up ready SB option still. CCU like EKY would have work to do. So, yea, being "not an option" kind of burns me. Any other school with LU's credentials, is already in and you all know it.

(06-06-2015 10:29 PM)knucklehead Wrote:  The absolute truth is that Liberty is the most move up ready SB option still. CCU like EKY would have work to do. So, yea, being "not an option" kind of burns me. Any other school with LU's credentials, is already in and you all know it.

Poor choice of words as Liberty has no credentials to speak of.

Any other school with Liberty's finances, facilities, and support (and location to boot) would already be in though. I fully grant you that.

(06-06-2015 10:39 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(06-06-2015 10:29 PM)knucklehead Wrote:  The absolute truth is that Liberty is the most move up ready SB option still. CCU like EKY would have work to do. So, yea, being "not an option" kind of burns me. Any other school with LU's credentials, is already in and you all know it.

Poor choice of words as Liberty has no credentials to speak of.

Any other school with Liberty's finances, facilities, and support (and location to boot) would already be in though. I fully grant you that.

I was using that to lump it all together, but I see what you are saying

(06-06-2015 10:39 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  Any other school with Liberty's finances, facilities, and support (and location to boot) would already be in though. I fully grant you that.

Libertys biggest problem is its rapid growth resulting in a P5 budget, and needing a G5 invite.

(06-06-2015 10:25 PM)knucklehead Wrote:  

(06-06-2015 10:01 PM)Usajags Wrote:  

(06-06-2015 09:35 PM)rokamortis Wrote:  

(06-06-2015 09:25 PM)knucklehead Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 09:35 PM)ARSTATEFAN1986 Wrote:  There may be more interest in Coastal Carolina.

Small stadium and low fan support for CCU, so sure why not. They'd have to build on and bus folks from afar.

Don't be bitter knucks

There stadium holds 10k, they average just under 10k..... Not sure I'd call that low fan support. If they were to build a 20k stadium, they may average 19k, they may average 10k, we don't know. But we do know a stadium that holds 20k and they average 8k, so I'm gonna bank on the first instead of the second.

I hope you aren't talking about Liberty......LU Averaged just over 17K. #5 in the country. So yea.
http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_r...e/2014.pdf

CCU in top 30 I found

Nope, not referring to Liberty. I personally have no issues with Liberty, as a Christian their beliefs don't frighten me. The private school issue is bigger for me, and I'm not afraid of that either. Just because they are a private school doesn't mean they are going to buy better athletes.

(06-07-2015 10:18 AM)Usajags Wrote:  

(06-06-2015 10:25 PM)knucklehead Wrote:  

(06-06-2015 10:01 PM)Usajags Wrote:  

(06-06-2015 09:35 PM)rokamortis Wrote:  

(06-06-2015 09:25 PM)knucklehead Wrote:  Small stadium and low fan support for CCU, so sure why not. They'd have to build on and bus folks from afar.

Don't be bitter knucks

There stadium holds 10k, they average just under 10k..... Not sure I'd call that low fan support. If they were to build a 20k stadium, they may average 19k, they may average 10k, we don't know. But we do know a stadium that holds 20k and they average 8k, so I'm gonna bank on the first instead of the second.

I hope you aren't talking about Liberty......LU Averaged just over 17K. #5 in the country. So yea.
http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_r...e/2014.pdf

CCU in top 30 I found

Nope, not referring to Liberty. I personally have no issues with Liberty, as a Christian their beliefs don't frighten me. The private school issue is bigger for me, and I'm not afraid of that either. Just because they are a private school doesn't mean they are going to buy better athletes.

If they could use their wealth to build great teams their football, basketball, baseball resume would be so strong that AD's would be asking the presidents to overlook the academic fit issues.

If Liberty fans want to think the Belt fears their resources then let them comfort themselves sucking on those sour grapes.

Presidents don't answer to athletic directors, they have to work with faculty, students, alumni, local community, and governing boards to hold their power. The school depends on the opinion of the leaders of other universities for their reputation rankings that shape how the school is rated.

While it is a page straight from a political campaign to make Notre Dame and Baylor and BYU analogies, that is dishonest. None have a student code of conduct as restrictive as Liberty, none went off half-cocked and barred students from having a chapter of the Young Democrats, none limit academic freedom as much, and none are primarily getting students online.

Liberty's leadership wants FBS to bolster name recognition and to be viewed more like a traditional institution. That's not a bad goal but that doesn't mean others want to be the vehicle for that.

(06-07-2015 05:08 AM)Liberty Fan Wrote:  

(06-06-2015 10:39 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  Any other school with Liberty's finances, facilities, and support (and location to boot) would already be in though. I fully grant you that.

Libertys biggest problem is its rapid growth resulting in a P5 budget, and needing a G5 invite.

Hey, if that helps you sleep at night believing that, more power to you.

(06-07-2015 11:00 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-07-2015 10:18 AM)Usajags Wrote:  

(06-06-2015 10:25 PM)knucklehead Wrote:  

(06-06-2015 10:01 PM)Usajags Wrote:  

(06-06-2015 09:35 PM)rokamortis Wrote:  Don't be bitter knucks

There stadium holds 10k, they average just under 10k..... Not sure I'd call that low fan support. If they were to build a 20k stadium, they may average 19k, they may average 10k, we don't know. But we do know a stadium that holds 20k and they average 8k, so I'm gonna bank on the first instead of the second.

I hope you aren't talking about Liberty......LU Averaged just over 17K. #5 in the country. So yea.
http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_r...e/2014.pdf

CCU in top 30 I found

Nope, not referring to Liberty. I personally have no issues with Liberty, as a Christian their beliefs don't frighten me. The private school issue is bigger for me, and I'm not afraid of that either. Just because they are a private school doesn't mean they are going to buy better athletes.

If they could use their wealth to build great teams their football, basketball, baseball resume would be so strong that AD's would be asking the presidents to overlook the academic fit issues.

If Liberty fans want to think the Belt fears their resources then let them comfort themselves sucking on those sour grapes.

Presidents don't answer to athletic directors, they have to work with faculty, students, alumni, local community, and governing boards to hold their power. The school depends on the opinion of the leaders of other universities for their reputation rankings that shape how the school is rated.

While it is a page straight from a political campaign to make Notre Dame and Baylor and BYU analogies, that is dishonest. None have a student code of conduct as restrictive as Liberty, none went off half-cocked and barred students from having a chapter of the Young Democrats, none limit academic freedom as much, and none are primarily getting students online.

Liberty's leadership wants FBS to bolster name recognition and to be viewed more like a traditional institution. That's not a bad goal but that doesn't mean others want to be the vehicle for that.

My quick Google search revealed that your spin is not factual. There doesn't seem to be a nickles difference in Baylor and Liberty's Student Policies & Procedures code. As far as politics go, all political clubs at Liberty including republicans and libertarian are classified as “unofficial clubs” and do not receive funding from university. They are allowed to use Liberty’s name, as long as they make it clear they are not being endorsed by the university. They are all allowed to use the school’s master calendar to schedule meeting rooms on campus, including Democrats.

http://www.baylor.edu/student_policies/i...p?id=22170

(06-07-2015 05:08 AM)Liberty Fan Wrote:  

(06-06-2015 10:39 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  Any other school with Liberty's finances, facilities, and support (and location to boot) would already be in though. I fully grant you that.

Libertys biggest problem is its rapid growth resulting in a P5 budget, and needing a G5 invite.

Please explain how Liberty has a "P5 budget".

As far as I can tell, you guys are far away from being a P5 school in any manner.

(06-07-2015 12:12 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  Please explain how Liberty has a "P5 budget".

It's all been discussed here many times, even the spinmeisters spinning against Liberty had complained about their commit and budget. Liberty is unique in that it's mission is attractive to older Christian adults and military members who want to continue their education via distance learning while continuing to work or serve (another 90,000). 103,500 students at a private school generates enough money for a P5 budget. Currently Liberty is at "on campus" capacity (13,500) and turning down additional students for the 2016 year. A campus rebuild is moving rapidly and they should he able to house 20,000 very soon.

(06-07-2015 12:53 PM)Liberty Fan Wrote:  

(06-07-2015 12:12 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  Please explain how Liberty has a "P5 budget".

It's all been discussed here many times, even the spinmeisters spinning against Liberty had complained about their commit and budget. Liberty is unique in that it's mission is attractive to older Christian adults and military members who want to continue their education via distance learning while continuing to work or serve (another 90,000). 103,500 students at a private school generates enough money for a P5 budget. Currently Liberty is at "on campus" capacity (13,500) and turning down additional students for the 2016 year. A campus rebuild is moving rapidly and they should he able to house 20,000 very soon.

And because of this you are entitled?

(06-07-2015 12:53 PM)Liberty Fan Wrote:  

(06-07-2015 12:12 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  Please explain how Liberty has a "P5 budget".

It's all been discussed here many times, even the spinmeisters spinning against Liberty had complained about their commit and budget. Liberty is unique in that it's mission is attractive to older Christian adults and military members who want to continue their education via distance learning while continuing to work or serve (another 90,000). 103,500 students at a private school generates enough money for a P5 budget. Currently Liberty is at "on campus" capacity (13,500) and turning down additional students for the 2016 year. A campus rebuild is moving rapidly and they should he able to house 20,000 very soon.

Liberty may reach it. Using today's data, the target to get in the range would be Mississippi State at $54,388,802, the P5 with the lowest athletic expenses in the USAToday NCAA Finances database. http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances

Liberty is not in that database because the database doesn't include privates, but the US Department of Education OPE Equity in Athletics database is showing $28,555,641 for Liberty. http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/GetOneInstitutionData.aspx (Just key in the university you are interested in.) Wake Forest is the lowest private P5 on the OPE database @ $56,247,495.

(06-07-2015 11:53 AM)Liberty Fan Wrote:  

(06-07-2015 11:00 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-07-2015 10:18 AM)Usajags Wrote:  

(06-06-2015 10:25 PM)knucklehead Wrote:  

(06-06-2015 10:01 PM)Usajags Wrote:  There stadium holds 10k, they average just under 10k..... Not sure I'd call that low fan support. If they were to build a 20k stadium, they may average 19k, they may average 10k, we don't know. But we do know a stadium that holds 20k and they average 8k, so I'm gonna bank on the first instead of the second.

I hope you aren't talking about Liberty......LU Averaged just over 17K. #5 in the country. So yea.
http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_r...e/2014.pdf

CCU in top 30 I found

Nope, not referring to Liberty. I personally have no issues with Liberty, as a Christian their beliefs don't frighten me. The private school issue is bigger for me, and I'm not afraid of that either. Just because they are a private school doesn't mean they are going to buy better athletes.

If they could use their wealth to build great teams their football, basketball, baseball resume would be so strong that AD's would be asking the presidents to overlook the academic fit issues.

If Liberty fans want to think the Belt fears their resources then let them comfort themselves sucking on those sour grapes.

Presidents don't answer to athletic directors, they have to work with faculty, students, alumni, local community, and governing boards to hold their power. The school depends on the opinion of the leaders of other universities for their reputation rankings that shape how the school is rated.

While it is a page straight from a political campaign to make Notre Dame and Baylor and BYU analogies, that is dishonest. None have a student code of conduct as restrictive as Liberty, none went off half-cocked and barred students from having a chapter of the Young Democrats, none limit academic freedom as much, and none are primarily getting students online.

Liberty's leadership wants FBS to bolster name recognition and to be viewed more like a traditional institution. That's not a bad goal but that doesn't mean others want to be the vehicle for that.

My quick Google search revealed that your spin is not factual. There doesn't seem to be a nickles difference in Baylor and Liberty's Student Policies & Procedures code. As far as politics go, all political clubs at Liberty including republicans and libertarian are classified as “unofficial clubs” and do not receive funding from university. They are allowed to use Liberty’s name, as long as they make it clear they are not being endorsed by the university. They are all allowed to use the school’s master calendar to schedule meeting rooms on campus, including Democrats.

http://www.baylor.edu/student_policies/i...p?id=22170

Talk about spin. The only reasons no clubs receive funding is because Liberty was about to be barred from the Federal teat for banning the Young Democrats. The idea was so heinous that the school defunded all clubs.

(06-07-2015 03:59 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Talk about spin. The only reasons no clubs receive funding is because Liberty was about to be barred from the Federal teat for banning the Young Democrats. The idea was so heinous that the school defunded all clubs.

Equal treatment if you ask me?

(06-07-2015 05:35 PM)Liberty Fan Wrote:  

(06-07-2015 03:59 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Talk about spin. The only reasons no clubs receive funding is because Liberty was about to be barred from the Federal teat for banning the Young Democrats. The idea was so heinous that the school defunded all clubs.

Equal treatment if you ask me?

Really?

(06-07-2015 05:41 PM)ARSTATEFAN1986 Wrote:  

(06-07-2015 05:35 PM)Liberty Fan Wrote:  

(06-07-2015 03:59 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Talk about spin. The only reasons no clubs receive funding is because Liberty was about to be barred from the Federal teat for banning the Young Democrats. The idea was so heinous that the school defunded all clubs.

Equal treatment if you ask me?

Really?

Yes, it is equal treatment.

Doesn't matter that it was forced on them or that their original intent was to simply silence those they disagreed with. The end result is equal treatment.

(06-07-2015 05:41 PM)ARSTATEFAN1986 Wrote:  Really?

How is not supporting "any" political clubs unequal?

(06-07-2015 05:35 PM)Liberty Fan Wrote:  

(06-07-2015 03:59 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Talk about spin. The only reasons no clubs receive funding is because Liberty was about to be barred from the Federal teat for banning the Young Democrats. The idea was so heinous that the school defunded all clubs.

Equal treatment if you ask me?

Only became equal treatment because of the threat of removing eligibility for Federal funding. Until then they were fine with having clubs as long as a Democratic party club wasn't one of them.

Now that we've established that the principles are dependent on money any other changes you want to make?