(10-17-2016 02:56 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Against UT for illegally developing a campus in Houston. You are free to do that now.

As does Cincy over the new Ohio St-Cincinnati campus going up. It's not fair to the Bearcats. But what really gets me is the new Penn St branch going up in Philly. It would be as alarming as ESPN putting up shop in the state of Connecticut and then creating a college athletics power structure that excluded Uconn. That would be bold.
Cheers!

everyone keeps acting like the leverage is on UTs side, thats wrong ...its on UH's side
there is this notion that its the might of UT vs the Might of UH..when in reality it the might of UH vs some hopeful intentions of UT

powerful UT alum/legislator arent going to fight for UT-Houston, they didnt go to that school and will not care what happens to it..they dont care about utrgv or utsa nor will they about this

while on the other hand every major UH political power will comeout against this ..as of today over 20 powerrful legislators have come out against ut-houston..ZERO have come out as pro ut-houston..UH has over 400,000 alum, ut-houston has none.. the politics will fall where the votes are

(10-17-2016 06:46 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(10-17-2016 06:36 PM)LRP Wrote:  

(10-17-2016 05:18 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-17-2016 02:56 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Against UT for illegally developing a campus in Houston.

On what grounds?

None. The only thing UH can do is get some sympathetic alumni in the state legislature to complain. Which will make a little noise but nothing will be done with the complaints.

Besides, the "UT-Houston" project is being initiated by the UT System not UT Austin. This is no different than the Texas A&M system dropping a new campus in UTSA's footprint.

there is legal grounds...we already had this discussion before.. there are laws in texas about about zoning universities. techincally buying te land itself could be viewed as illegal

there is a reason UT wont call it a school or "ut-houston"..they keep walking around it trying not to break any laws and always refer to it as a intellectual hub

and no offense, utsa is a sister school, you arent the main school in the UT system, i doubt youd have anywhere the power UH would in preventing another campus ,with our own BoR and state sponsorship...

we have UH victoria..if a&m wanted to make a A&M Victoria i doubt we could do squat about it and likely wouldn't even fight it...its not the same with your main campus

I see your point but do you honestly think UH is going to be able to fight off the biggest dog in the state.

By the way, I never understood the UH-Victoria campus. It always seemed like it would make more sense for Victoria to fall under the A&M system.

(10-17-2016 06:49 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  And there are legal ground to put Hillary Clinton in jail but instead, she'll likely be president.

Thank goodness.

You all want to have a state entity try and enjoin another state entity based alleged breach of a state law. Did it dawn on you that if you win, they'll just change the state law?

(10-17-2016 07:00 PM)LRP Wrote:  

(10-17-2016 06:46 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(10-17-2016 06:36 PM)LRP Wrote:  

(10-17-2016 05:18 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-17-2016 02:56 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Against UT for illegally developing a campus in Houston.

On what grounds?

None. The only thing UH can do is get some sympathetic alumni in the state legislature to complain. Which will make a little noise but nothing will be done with the complaints.

Besides, the "UT-Houston" project is being initiated by the UT System not UT Austin. This is no different than the Texas A&M system dropping a new campus in UTSA's footprint.

there is legal grounds...we already had this discussion before.. there are laws in texas about about zoning universities. techincally buying te land itself could be viewed as illegal

there is a reason UT wont call it a school or "ut-houston"..they keep walking around it trying not to break any laws and always refer to it as a intellectual hub

and no offense, utsa is a sister school, you arent the main school in the UT system, i doubt youd have anywhere the power UH would in preventing another campus ,with our own BoR and state sponsorship...

we have UH victoria..if a&m wanted to make a A&M Victoria i doubt we could do squat about it and likely wouldn't even fight it...its not the same with your main campus

I see your point but do you honestly think UH is going to be able to fight off the biggest dog in the state.

By the way, I never understood the UH-Victoria campus. It always seemed like it would make more sense for Victoria to fall under the A&M system.

read my statement above .. UT-big dogs aren't going to care

UH big dogs will... our powerful people will fight this tooth and nail

ut itself isn't threatened, getting this isn't vital, and supporting this will get you backlash from uh alumni
like i said no politician has actual come in support of this, and risk it for what?

Are you serious? Houston has zero claims in a lawsuit and it would be dismissed immediately.

(10-17-2016 07:38 PM)Savacool Wrote:  Are you serious? Houston has zero claims in a lawsuit and it would be dismissed immediately.

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/local/ed...646162.php

(10-17-2016 07:42 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(10-17-2016 07:38 PM)Savacool Wrote:  Are you serious? Houston has zero claims in a lawsuit and it would be dismissed immediately.

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/local/ed...646162.php

It's was illegal in Tennessee. Circumstances a bit different.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University..._Nashville

Love people not from Texas commenting and talking out their ass on how our laws work.

Love people in Houston thinking a city trumps the state

Love ex-smu washouts that work at Dairy Whip commenting on anything that requires mental cognizance...

(10-17-2016 09:14 PM)justin_sane15 Wrote:  Love people not from Texas commenting and talking out their ass on how our laws work.

I know that darn constitution and the federal government telling you what to do.

Welcome to the real world, where the more powerful stomp on those they can!

(10-17-2016 06:36 PM)LRP Wrote:  

(10-17-2016 05:18 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-17-2016 02:56 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Against UT for illegally developing a campus in Houston.

On what grounds?

None. The only thing UH can do is get some sympathetic alumni in the state legislature to complain. Which will make a little noise but nothing will be done with the complaints.

Besides, the "UT-Houston" project is being initiated by the UT System not UT Austin. This is no different than the Texas A&M system dropping a new campus in UTSA's footprint.

actually you have it backwards

the campus will be under UT Austin and administered by UT Austin

that is why the land purchase using PUF funds was in fact legal and that is why there is no THCEB approval needed (which THECB approval is just a rubber stamp and meaningless since the legislature is the one that makes the decisions)

and the fact that it will be administered by UT Austin is why UT Austin alumni and supporters will care about the project

if it was the system buying land using PUF funds for an entirely new campus with their own administration then it is possible that laws would have been broken with the purchase and the THECB would need to approve new degree offerings (which again is really meaningless because the legislature makes the decisions and if they want it it happens and they fund it)

because the UT-Houston campus will be a part of UT Austin the use of PUF funds was legal and they can offer any degrees there that are currently offered at UT Austin or that UT Austin is approved to offer

the only way the project can be stopped at this point is if the legislature specifically passes a law to prevent it........there is no legislative or THECB approval (rubber stamping) needed for it to move forward

(10-17-2016 09:21 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Love ex-smu washouts that work at Dairy Whip commenting on anything that requires mental cognizance...

Hey, I was smart until you introduced me to Nitrous Oxide from whipped cream cans

(10-17-2016 05:18 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-17-2016 02:56 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Against UT for illegally developing a campus in Houston.

On what grounds?

Is UT's Houston purchase an illegal 'land grab?'
http://www.houstonchronicle.com/local/ed...646162.php

(10-17-2016 04:46 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(10-17-2016 04:38 PM)pesik Wrote:  but something interesting to note, is according to trotter ut and ttech were the first to leave and left early

remember the governor said it was UH or no one ...maybe ut and texas block held strong to that and the other non-texas wanted elsewhere ..so it ended up as no one

mcmurphy said it wasnt that they didnt want expansion but that no one could get the votes..you need the texas bloc for the votes needed to expand for anyone

You go ahead and tell yourself it was because Houston was not voted on

Actually, it's circular. You also need the non-Texas block to expand with anyone.

But...but...will Paul Wall make his grills in LSU purple and gold?!?

ake Trotter ‏@Jake_Trotter 25m25 minutes ago
Jake Trotter Retweeted Armando Walle
Houston lawmaker here. Suspecting there could be some political fallout between UH/UT

(10-18-2016 12:39 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  ake Trotter ‏@Jake_Trotter 25m25 minutes ago
Jake Trotter Retweeted Armando Walle
Houston lawmaker here. Suspecting there could be some political fallout between UH/UT

Armando Walle ‏@RepWalle 54m54 minutes ago

Armando Walle Retweeted Jake Trotter

No fallout from me. One thing we do in Houston, TX is fight the right way when we get knocked down. This ain't Cougar High anymore.