The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

http://usajaguars.com/news/2015/7/6/FB_0...ata=599659

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2015/...ore_sports

Wonder if they will solicit the help of Carr and Associates. I am happy for them, shows how quickly you can build a program when the BOT, president, and supporters work together.

They had already been talking about an OCS to replace Ladd about the time they started playing D1. It's amazing what can happen if your BOT/President is supportive of you

UAB outdraws them at the gate and UAB gets shut down and USA deserves a stadium.

Truthfully, good for them. Cant wait to beat them in it.

Why was USA able to escape the domination of the UA System BOT but UAB can't? They both have state supported medical schools. The OCS issue is just one more example of their independence.

(07-07-2015 10:11 AM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  Why was USA able to escape the domination of the UA System BOT but UAB can't? They both have state supported medical schools. The OCS issue is just one more example of their independence.

I suspect it has something to do with timing. In the pre-Voting Rights Act era, The Machine could exercise all the control it wished through the instruments of state government. Afterwards, the Trustees seem to have grown in importance as a means of controlling valuable state assets for private gain without the annoyances of democratic oversight. While The Machine is still powerful in electoral politics, you're still looking at a roll of the iron dice (like, what if Troy King's hobbies had become open knowledge after the Republican primary? Or what insane thing will Roy Moore do today?). By using the self-perpetuating Trustees as the means of control, there is far less risk. If USA were UAM today, they would not be able to break away either.

(07-07-2015 10:49 AM)58-56 Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 10:11 AM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  Why was USA able to escape the domination of the UA System BOT but UAB can't? They both have state supported medical schools. The OCS issue is just one more example of their independence.

I suspect it has something to do with timing. In the pre-Voting Rights Act era, The Machine could exercise all the control it wished through the instruments of state government. Afterwards, the Trustees seem to have grown in importance as a means of controlling valuable state assets for private gain without the annoyances of democratic oversight. While The Machine is still powerful in electoral politics, you're still looking at a roll of the iron dice (like, what if Troy King's hobbies had become open knowledge after the Republican primary? Or what insane thing will Roy Moore do today?). By using the self-perpetuating Trustees as the means of control, there is far less risk. If USA were UAM today, they would not be able to break away either.

Economic and political isolation, combined with a legislative delegation that worked together and put a huge priority on two items consistently (one was the Port of Mobile - the other was USA), and economic independence (which resulted from blind luck - natural gas was found on USA's land).

It also helps that the AU/UA rivalry really isn't as crazy on the coast. Sure, they have their supporters, and the support is strong, but there are few in the region that see supporting USA as incompatible with supporting Auburn or Alabama. USA also has worked to put together programs with both Alabama and Auburn, which helps keep USA neutral in this regard.

By the way, there's a flip side to that as well. UAB, when it was on 'good terms' with the legislature/Machine, frequently got more and better assistance from the state.

(07-07-2015 11:33 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  economic independence (which resulted from blind luck - natural gas was found on USA's land).

Did this occur before or after separation?

(07-07-2015 12:21 PM)58-56 Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 11:33 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  economic independence (which resulted from blind luck - natural gas was found on USA's land).

Did this occur before or after separation?

The property and related mineral rights were provided somewhere around separation. It wasn't that valuable at the time.

The state tried to retake those properties in the 80's when the velue of those rights had become quite valuable. They failed in that attempt.

(07-07-2015 10:49 AM)58-56 Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 10:11 AM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  Why was USA able to escape the domination of the UA System BOT but UAB can't? They both have state supported medical schools. The OCS issue is just one more example of their independence.

I suspect it has something to do with timing. In the pre-Voting Rights Act era, The Machine could exercise all the control it wished through the instruments of state government. Afterwards, the Trustees seem to have grown in importance as a means of controlling valuable state assets for private gain without the annoyances of democratic oversight. While The Machine is still powerful in electoral politics, you're still looking at a roll of the iron dice (like, what if Troy King's hobbies had become open knowledge after the Republican primary? Or what insane thing will Roy Moore do today?). By using the self-perpetuating Trustees as the means of control, there is far less risk. If USA were UAM today, they would not be able to break away either.

The UNA, UWA, Troy, Jacksonville State, Athens State etc were all set up as colleges independent of the Auburn System or the University System. They also received a lessor per student funding since they were not comprehensive university.

George Wallace ran for reelection against an incumbent governor and won with the rural vote (remember a lot of minority urban were still disenfranchised). He promised education and rural physicians This first resulted in the very large JC system.

Wallace also asked UAB to add 150 doctors to specialize in rural practice. UAB refused with the stated then common reasoning that it might jeopardize income of current doctors. Wallace then chose USA over Troy and Auburn(more opportunities to intern). This is how USA got an "independent" SOM.

(07-07-2015 12:29 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 12:21 PM)58-56 Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 11:33 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  economic independence (which resulted from blind luck - natural gas was found on USA's land).

Did this occur before or after separation?

The property and related mineral rights were provided somewhere around separation. It wasn't that valuable at the time.

The state tried to retake those properties in the 80's when the velue of those rights had become quite valuable. They failed in that attempt.

Unfortunately for UAB, they already know about the coal. We just have to hope they don't find out about the unobtanium deposits underneath Woodward House.

(07-07-2015 12:37 PM)uabbean Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 10:49 AM)58-56 Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 10:11 AM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  Why was USA able to escape the domination of the UA System BOT but UAB can't? They both have state supported medical schools. The OCS issue is just one more example of their independence.

I suspect it has something to do with timing. In the pre-Voting Rights Act era, The Machine could exercise all the control it wished through the instruments of state government. Afterwards, the Trustees seem to have grown in importance as a means of controlling valuable state assets for private gain without the annoyances of democratic oversight. While The Machine is still powerful in electoral politics, you're still looking at a roll of the iron dice (like, what if Troy King's hobbies had become open knowledge after the Republican primary? Or what insane thing will Roy Moore do today?). By using the self-perpetuating Trustees as the means of control, there is far less risk. If USA were UAM today, they would not be able to break away either.

The UNA, UWA, Troy, Jacksonville State, Athens State etc were all set up as colleges independent of the Auburn System or the University System. They also received a lessor per student funding since they were not comprehensive university.

George Wallace ran for reelection against an incumbent governor and won with the rural vote (remember a lot of minority urban were still disenfranchised). He promised education and rural physicians This first resulted in the very large JC system.

Wallace also asked UAB to add 150 doctors to specialize in rural practice. UAB refused with the stated then common reasoning that it might jeopardize income of current doctors. Wallace then chose USA over Troy and Auburn(more opportunities to intern). This is how USA got an "independent" SOM.

An additional factor after the VRA of 1965 was Mobile's continued support for George Wallace which Jeffco / B'ham did not provide. That resulted in many years delays in connecting Interstates out of Jeffco until all others in the state had been completed. It also resulted in Mobile getting both top legislative posts given to their people - Sage Lyons as SOTH and Pierre Pelham as pro temp head of the Senate. At the time these posts had absolute control of committee assignments and what bills were sent to what committees. That also played an important part in Mobile getting its own independent medical - and now pharmacy - school.

The JUCO system later was involved in a scandal that resulted in jail time. This was the result of Wallace's design to provide dependable funding for his legacy program by tying the schools intimately with the legislature. [BTW, The JUCOs receive the only tax on alcoholic beverage (.02 on every bottle/can of beer) that goes to any state educational level.] By giving legislative leaders a profit motive to support his JUCOs, he assured they would not have to annually beg for SETF funding like K-12 does. Many legislative "friends" (and their families) got very lucrative JUCO administrative jobs, JUCO teachers don't have the "publish or perish" imperative and were (still are?) the best paid Post Secondary positions in Alabama.

(07-07-2015 01:59 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 12:37 PM)uabbean Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 10:49 AM)58-56 Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 10:11 AM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  Why was USA able to escape the domination of the UA System BOT but UAB can't? They both have state supported medical schools. The OCS issue is just one more example of their independence.

I suspect it has something to do with timing. In the pre-Voting Rights Act era, The Machine could exercise all the control it wished through the instruments of state government. Afterwards, the Trustees seem to have grown in importance as a means of controlling valuable state assets for private gain without the annoyances of democratic oversight. While The Machine is still powerful in electoral politics, you're still looking at a roll of the iron dice (like, what if Troy King's hobbies had become open knowledge after the Republican primary? Or what insane thing will Roy Moore do today?). By using the self-perpetuating Trustees as the means of control, there is far less risk. If USA were UAM today, they would not be able to break away either.

The UNA, UWA, Troy, Jacksonville State, Athens State etc were all set up as colleges independent of the Auburn System or the University System. They also received a lessor per student funding since they were not comprehensive university.

George Wallace ran for reelection against an incumbent governor and won with the rural vote (remember a lot of minority urban were still disenfranchised). He promised education and rural physicians This first resulted in the very large JC system.

Wallace also asked UAB to add 150 doctors to specialize in rural practice. UAB refused with the stated then common reasoning that it might jeopardize income of current doctors. Wallace then chose USA over Troy and Auburn(more opportunities to intern). This is how USA got an "independent" SOM.

An additional factor after the VRA of 1965 was Mobile's continued support for George Wallace which Jeffco / B'ham did not provide. That resulted in many years delays in connecting Interstates out of Jeffco until all others in the state had been completed. It also resulted in Mobile getting both top legislative posts given to their people - Sage Lyons as SOTH and Pierre Pelham as pro temp head of the Senate. At the time these posts had absolute control of committee assignments and what bills were sent to what committees.

The JUCO system later was involved in a scandal that resulted in jail time. This was the result of Wallace's design to provide dependable funding for his legacy program by tying the schools intimately with the legislature. [BTW, The JUCOs receive the only tax on alcoholic beverage (.02 on every bottle/can of beer) that goes to any state educational level.] By giving legislative leaders a profit motive to support his JUCOs, he assured they would not have to annually beg for SETF funding like K-12 does. Many legislative "friends" (and their families) got very lucrative JUCO administrative jobs, JUCO teachers don't have the "publish or perish" imperative and were (still are?) the best paid Post Secondary positions in Alabama.

Actually, I-10 wasn't connected out of Mobile until the mid 1970's. I-65 wasn't connected until the early 1980's. When did I-65 and I-20 get completed in Central Alabama?

Sage Lyons? Boy that's a blast from the past. He didn't make it to the Speaker's Chair until 1971. I'm assuming that instead of the 1965 VRA issue, that you're talking about the result of the Brewer-Wallace Democratic Primary Runoff in 1970. Sage was only SOTH until 75 and from what I was told, he was really more concerned with issues related to the Alabama State Docks than anything else.

An additional factor after the VRA of 1965 was Mobile's continued support for George Wallace which Jeffco / B'ham did not provide. That resulted in many years delays in connecting Interstates out of Jeffco until all others in the state had been completed. It also resulted in Mobile getting both top legislative posts given to their people - Sage Lyons as SOTH and Pierre Pelham as pro temp head of the Senate. At the time these posts had absolute control of committee assignments and what bills were sent to what committees.

Actually, I-10 wasn't connected out of Mobile until the mid 1970's. I-65 wasn't connected until the early 1980's. When did I-65 and I-20 get completed in Central Alabama?

I GOOGLED but could not ascertain exact dates for completions of interstates out of B'ham. It did mention that since Jeffco was the only county to not vote for George Wallace in 1962, he reportedly vowed to stop all interstate construction there in 1963. It was therefore the mid80s or later before any were completed out of Jeffco.

Until then, I 59-20 W ended in Fairfield near USX, I 65N ended at Fultondale, I 65S ended in Hoover, I 59E ended in Roebuck, I 20E ended at Eastwood @ Montevallo Rd (Irondale) and the only segment of I 459 completed early was from US 31 to US 280 when John Harbert endowed a "Chair" at UAB (reportedly to protect his investments in Riverchase) to pay Wallace for many years. That section now is named in Harbert's honor. The "future I 22" is today complete all the way to Memphis EXCEPT for the part in Jeffco. SURPRISE, SURPRISE!!

(07-07-2015 05:45 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  I GOOGLED but could not ascertain exact dates for completions of interstates out of B'ham.

Spring 1986, the stretch just south of the Warrior exit. I covered the grand opening, wrote one damned fine and underhandedly sarcastic piece.

The stretch of I-65 that connected North Shelby County to Birmingham opened in May of 1981, the week I graduated high school.