Followers of NCAA happenings, particularly college football fans, are aware of the chaos concerning the future of the Big 12 and likely birth of the PAC-16. With Nebraska on her way to the Big Ten, the demise of the Big 12 may be near with six teams including Texas, Texas Tech, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Colorado possibly joining the PAC-10 to form the new PAC-16.
One thing seems certain at this point: Baylor University is on the verge of getting royally screwed.
With that in mind, Orangebloods.com offers this revealing tid-bit:
Since Orangebloods.com reported last Thursday that the Pac-10 was looking to add the Big 12 South (minus Baylor) and Colorado, legislators and lobbyists loyal to Baylor have launched an all-out effort in the Texas Legislature to ensure that Baylor remains with the rest of the Big 12 South if it were to move to the Pac-10.
That effort appears to have fallen short, because Colorado officials, who met Tuesday night, have agreed to accept a big to the Pac-10, according to multiple sources.
One top source close to the possible merger between the Pac-10 and six Big 12 schools said some schools in the Pac-10, including California-Berkeley, have a real issue with adding an institution with religious ties like Baylor to the conference.
Well, this tidbit should not surprise anyone. Secular liberals surely do not hold some high ground. For all the talk of tolerance and inclusiveness, liberals can be quite intolerant too. This is an excellent case in point.
Hopefully at least a few Big 12 folks will recognize - through, in part, this example of liberal intolerance, Berkeley style - that culturally, the Pac-10 is not a good fit for most Big 12 schools. The fan bases of Tech & UT definitely will not make the top of any unchurched statistic put out by Pew Forum. And despite Aggie violators of the clear teachings of Scripture (Leviticus 20:15, Deuteronomy 27:21, etc.), College Station sure does have its share of churches with people actually in the pews!
UC Berkeley sucks.
Related posts:
- Report: University of Texas To Commit to 10-member Big12 Mr. Big12isDead Chip Brown of Orangebloods.com - who originally broke...
- Wade Burleson and Religious Intolerance, Take Two Yesterday, Robert Parham of the Baptist Center for Ethics (and...
- Berkeley Blog Vacation Tomorrow begins my week-long blog vacation which will be...
- Wade Burleson and Religious Intolerance Rev. Wade Burleson, a popular yet controversial Baptist blogger and...
- Texas Baptists, Baylor University and Homosexuality A few pieces of news that haven’t received much coverage:...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
I had no idea about the Berkeley objection. Thanks for educating me. Reprehensible.
As to the Aggie thing, you’re BAAAAAD!
You are right about leftists. many of them are bigtime hypocrits when it comes to tolerance.
Concerning football, it’s become very hard for a private university to be competitive anymore. I think that Baylor’s football future will probably resemble that of Rice and Tulane. I wouldn’t mind being wrong on that, though.
MWC is supposedly looking to expand. Baylor would fit in there. Really, the only thing that might save all this from happening is if Congress intervenes to institute a playoff. According to one of the Yahoo Sports writers all the athletic department financial woes would be gone if playoffs were instituted.
Likely less due to intolerance than lack of awareness, or ignorance if you will, not that the two cannot be related. Given two entities, Texas and baptist, a good many people in this country think “good grief.” Moreover, given some behaviors that have come out of each in the past several years, such is not entirely unjustified. They will not let Baylor play with them? So what; it is not a baptist issue of much importance. Focus, instead, on academics; I would rather Baylor folks save their getting up-in-arms about those issues.
“Focus on academics” is a nice sentiment. But it’s not that simple.
Baylor is a private, tuition-driven school that does not have a massive endowment like elite private institutions. Baylor Big 12 athletics bring in millions to the university and the community. The athletic programs help attract students and donors which in turn allows Baylor to devote more money to research, better technology, new facilities, etc.
BDW: The athletic programs help ….
bapticus hereticus: Research, however, by and large, does not support these assertions. There is a mythology surrounding NCAA D1 that is difficult to puncture.
I’m sure that’s true for some schools. Although, I’m sure that research is not specific to Baylor University.
I don’t know any person here, who is familiar with the workings of Baylor University, that would agree with your statement. The athletic programs do help and have helped since the mid-90s. In light of the public response in this area, it is clear that most recognize that getting bumped out of the Big 12 is about much more than just athletics.
http://tinyurl.com/perrymanbig12
You are right, Aaron, I do not know that much about Baylor, but that is not really my point. The point is that many schools seek or desire higher levels of NCCA competition hoping and thinking that such will bring improvements in many institutional areas, but research does not support that what is sought is significantly impacted by such. There are a few studies supporting the notion, but it is overwhelmed by numerous studies, over a long period of time, that make the case that much of what is believed about NCAA programming is not supportable. Only a few NCAA athletic programs actually make money for a school. Goodness, Duke lost a couple million dollars this year with its men’s basketball team. Which academic program is going to feel this pinch? Having said that, I support NCAA programming, but my research and involvement in said programming over my career, have opened my eyes to the realities and unrealities surrounding it.
The game that is played is interesting. One will read of sports bringing in ‘x’ dollars for this and that which is not sport, but the sport program itself will be in the red and will require funds, nonetheless, to keep it afloat. Yes, the money can be said to come from the gate, but it went ‘here’ instead of funding the opening of the gate! Baylor basketball, a good draw, in the last accounting reported this year, had revenues of $4,595,742. It also had expenses of $4,595,742. It is doubtful other Baylor sports, except perhaps football, will have the potential for creating revenue for the school. Let’s have NCAA sports, but let’s also be realistic about their impacts. Considering the costing of athletics: ugh, well, it is problematic. At best costs are underestimated. And that helps propel the myths which surround it.
Instead of being concerned about where Baylor plays football, I would be concerned about the 6-year graduation rate of Baylor athletes that was reported in 2009. The NCAA graduation rate was 56% compared with about a 71% graduation rate for non-athletes. And keep in mind, the NCAA graduation rate allows adjustments to the denominator (i.e., transfers), that the federal rate (i.e., IPEDS) does not allow; that is, the NCAA grad rate tends to be a bit more generous.
I read somewhere (in the last six months, think it was a local newpaper article about Texas Christian University) that half the alumni who contributed money were interested in the athletic program and the other half in academic program. The athletic programs themselves may not generate money, but it is the avenue to the checkbook of half the alumni.
Personally, I think Baylor might be a better school if it dropped their sports program and focused on being a Christian, academic institution. But politically that won’t fly with the alumni.
BDW,
I read your post to my wife (BU Alumn), and she loved it.
Tim
There’s so much information coming from so many different sources about all of this, not sure the UT grapevine is the most accurate source of information. The rationale behind the Pac-10 expansion is a counter to the television deal that the SEC recently negotiated, worth over a billion dollars. Money is the bottom line, and television market drawing power is the sales pitch. The Pac-10 is a conference that splits all television revenue, and bowl game bucks, evenly with all schools and expansion must be approved unanimously. They are looking for schools with lots of alumni and lots of pull in big television markets to compete with the package that the SEC put together, and neither Baylor nor Waco can compete with the other three Texas schools in the mix. The Aggies have been talking about holding out for a deal with the SEC, but that’s just talk, since the SEC is apparently not interested.
UC Bezerkely may be putting their objection up to Baylor’s religious background to cover up their hypocrisy over the financial greed involved in this kind of deal, but the bottom line here is money and the evidence of its power and pull is the fact that the political influence put together to include Baylor as part of the package was like a straw fence against a wildfire.
Do you think there’s any chance Baylor would be able to lobby for a bid to join the SEC?
Profane cheap shots against Texas Aggies hardly warranted. Apologize!
Proud Aggie, Class of ‘80