RE: Who is "On Deck" To Replace WKU and keep us at 12?
(03-26-2013 06:57 PM)ark30inf Wrote: I have no idea about KSU. Not sure what that has to do with it.
But the vast majority of Sun Belt schools have serious legal and financial restrictions on what they can and can't do as state institutions. Many of these restrictions are good policy...many of them are placed on us by larger institutions in our state as nasty little obstacles to our growth and advancement. Nearly all of us share this common bond and burden...and are thus similarly competitive. Our budgets are varied but they are in a fairly narrow range at the lower end of the FBS spectrum.
Injecting a private institution into this mix that is not bound by such restrictions will be something new. It can be a good thing....and it can be a bad thing.
I think it is incumbent on the petitioner to make the case that having a school that can raise its athletic budget to ACC levels at will, and without the same oversight, will not upset the competitive balance that we have enjoyed and that have been the hallmark of the Sun Belt.
Would Liberty use its special status for the common good...or for evil.
These are valid concerns. Do you want to raise the conference profile or lower it? The KSU reference came from several people who wanted KSU over Liberty. IMHO they shouldn't even be included in the discussion.
From this point forth if anyone wants numbers, come to me.
We don't care.
YOU do not care. Others do. Perhaps I posted that moreso to educate my Liberty friends on this board. I do not want false information to permeate these boards.
RE: Who is "On Deck" To Replace WKU and keep us at 12?
(03-26-2013 07:15 PM)Campaign4Liberty Wrote:
(03-26-2013 06:57 PM)ark30inf Wrote: I have no idea about KSU. Not sure what that has to do with it.
But the vast majority of Sun Belt schools have serious legal and financial restrictions on what they can and can't do as state institutions. Many of these restrictions are good policy...many of them are placed on us by larger institutions in our state as nasty little obstacles to our growth and advancement. Nearly all of us share this common bond and burden...and are thus similarly competitive. Our budgets are varied but they are in a fairly narrow range at the lower end of the FBS spectrum.
Injecting a private institution into this mix that is not bound by such restrictions will be something new. It can be a good thing....and it can be a bad thing.
I think it is incumbent on the petitioner to make the case that having a school that can raise its athletic budget to ACC levels at will, and without the same oversight, will not upset the competitive balance that we have enjoyed and that have been the hallmark of the Sun Belt.
Would Liberty use its special status for the common good...or for evil.
These are valid concerns. Do you want to raise the conference profile or lower it? The KSU reference came from several people who wanted KSU over Liberty. IMHO they shouldn't even be included in the discussion.
I really don't know if the answer to this question can be answered by anyone but your administration. I'd have to see the actual proposal made to the conference and I don't think I ever will.....are you subject to FOIA?
Anyway....I can see where Liberty could leverage some of their assets...especially media assets...to help raise the conference profile.
I can also see where Liberty could make the FBS move and blow their budget out to try to overwhelm the public institutions they are competing against and raise their own profile.
There is nothing wrong with that in general. It is to be expected. But we are a conference with a relative balance. It is a concern.
From this point forth if anyone wants numbers, come to me.
We don't care.
YOU do not care. Others do. Perhaps I posted that moreso to educate my Liberty friends on this board. I do not want false information to permeate these boards.
RE: Who is "On Deck" To Replace WKU and keep us at 12?
(03-26-2013 07:25 PM)ark30inf Wrote:
(03-26-2013 07:15 PM)Campaign4Liberty Wrote:
(03-26-2013 06:57 PM)ark30inf Wrote: I have no idea about KSU. Not sure what that has to do with it.
But the vast majority of Sun Belt schools have serious legal and financial restrictions on what they can and can't do as state institutions. Many of these restrictions are good policy...many of them are placed on us by larger institutions in our state as nasty little obstacles to our growth and advancement. Nearly all of us share this common bond and burden...and are thus similarly competitive. Our budgets are varied but they are in a fairly narrow range at the lower end of the FBS spectrum.
Injecting a private institution into this mix that is not bound by such restrictions will be something new. It can be a good thing....and it can be a bad thing.
I think it is incumbent on the petitioner to make the case that having a school that can raise its athletic budget to ACC levels at will, and without the same oversight, will not upset the competitive balance that we have enjoyed and that have been the hallmark of the Sun Belt.
Would Liberty use its special status for the common good...or for evil.
These are valid concerns. Do you want to raise the conference profile or lower it? The KSU reference came from several people who wanted KSU over Liberty. IMHO they shouldn't even be included in the discussion.
I really don't know if the answer to this question can be answered by anyone but your administration. I'd have to see the actual proposal made to the conference and I don't think I ever will.....are you subject to FOIA?
Anyway....I can see where Liberty could leverage some of their assets...especially media assets...to help raise the conference profile.
I can also see where Liberty could make the FBS move and blow their budget out to try to overwhelm the public institutions they are competing against and raise their own profile.
There is nothing wrong with that in general. It is to be expected. But we are a conference with a relative balance. It is a concern.
I do know Liberty stated our media assets are available to be utilized by the conference so they have already said that including showing contests not involving Liberty
From this point forth if anyone wants numbers, come to me.
We don't care.
YOU do not care. Others do. Perhaps I posted that moreso to educate my Liberty friends on this board. I do not want false information to permeate these boards.
(03-12-2013 03:31 PM)Campaign4Liberty Wrote: Once again this board has shown an incredible resolve to steer the discussion away from the facts, away from objective dialogue, and into the realm of ridiculous teeny bopping banter. I am finished. You people are impossible to debate in any way that even closely resembles objectivity. As the majority of you have college degrees you should be ashamed of yourselves for acting like children and refusing to debate me objectively.
This is my last post on these boards until we receive an SBC invite, which is coming this spring, mark my words on that.
Aren't honesty and holding to one's word values that that Liberty espouses??
(This post was last modified: 03-26-2013 07:36 PM by LifetimeTopper.)
RE: Who is "On Deck" To Replace WKU and keep us at 12?
(03-26-2013 07:15 PM)Campaign4Liberty Wrote: The KSU reference came from several people who wanted KSU over Liberty. IMHO they shouldn't even be included in the discussion.
Glad to know you have a "humble" opinion on who should and shouldn't be discussed for membership in a conference you aren't a part of, especially when you have such an obvious conflict of interest...
RE: Who is "On Deck" To Replace WKU and keep us at 12?
Arc30inf does have a point. I would think that if Liberty were offered there could be somekind of agreement to play by the same rules...I could see that as a legitimate concern. As far as JMU, I've been to a number of JMU games, they would also be a great addition. I think LU has a better location, we're closer to the Sunbelt schools than JMU. I also believe LU is more up-and-coming. Having said that, JMU has more tradition and a huge stadium. Either would be a good addition, and I think they would both be better options than Jacksonville State or Lamar.
RE: Who is "On Deck" To Replace WKU and keep us at 12?
(03-26-2013 07:25 PM)ark30inf Wrote:
(03-26-2013 07:15 PM)Campaign4Liberty Wrote:
(03-26-2013 06:57 PM)ark30inf Wrote: I have no idea about KSU. Not sure what that has to do with it.
But the vast majority of Sun Belt schools have serious legal and financial restrictions on what they can and can't do as state institutions. Many of these restrictions are good policy...many of them are placed on us by larger institutions in our state as nasty little obstacles to our growth and advancement. Nearly all of us share this common bond and burden...and are thus similarly competitive. Our budgets are varied but they are in a fairly narrow range at the lower end of the FBS spectrum.
Injecting a private institution into this mix that is not bound by such restrictions will be something new. It can be a good thing....and it can be a bad thing.
I think it is incumbent on the petitioner to make the case that having a school that can raise its athletic budget to ACC levels at will, and without the same oversight, will not upset the competitive balance that we have enjoyed and that have been the hallmark of the Sun Belt.
Would Liberty use its special status for the common good...or for evil.
These are valid concerns. Do you want to raise the conference profile or lower it? The KSU reference came from several people who wanted KSU over Liberty. IMHO they shouldn't even be included in the discussion.
I really don't know if the answer to this question can be answered by anyone but your administration. I'd have to see the actual proposal made to the conference and I don't think I ever will.....are you subject to FOIA?
Anyway....I can see where Liberty could leverage some of their assets...especially media assets...to help raise the conference profile.
I can also see where Liberty could make the FBS move and blow their budget out to try to overwhelm the public institutions they are competing against and raise their own profile.
There is nothing wrong with that in general. It is to be expected. But we are a conference with a relative balance. It is a concern.
Again valid concerns. But I would argue that by raising our own profile (as you mentioned what school would not want to) we also raise the profile of the conference. Of the non BCS(playoff) conferences, where does the Sun Belt want to be?
From this point forth if anyone wants numbers, come to me.
We don't care.
YOU do not care. Others do. Perhaps I posted that moreso to educate my Liberty friends on this board. I do not want false information to permeate these boards.
(03-12-2013 03:31 PM)Campaign4Liberty Wrote: Once again this board has shown an incredible resolve to steer the discussion away from the facts, away from objective dialogue, and into the realm of ridiculous teeny bopping banter. I am finished. You people are impossible to debate in any way that even closely resembles objectivity. As the majority of you have college degrees you should be ashamed of yourselves for acting like children and refusing to debate me objectively.
This is my last post on these boards until we receive an SBC invite, which is coming this spring, mark my words on that.
Aren't honesty and holding to one's word values that that Liberty espouses??
RE: Who is "On Deck" To Replace WKU and keep us at 12?
(03-26-2013 07:43 PM)jimflamesfan Wrote: Arc30inf does have a point. I would think that if Liberty were offered there could be somekind of agreement to play by the same rules...I could see that as a legitimate concern. As far as JMU, I've been to a number of JMU games, they would also be a great addition. I think LU has a better location, we're closer to the Sunbelt schools than JMU. I also believe LU is more up-and-coming. Having said that, JMU has more tradition and a huge stadium. Either would be a good addition, and I think they would both be better options than Jacksonville State or Lamar.
Those same rules are the NCAA rules, everyone abides by them. Beyond that, why limit the competitive advantage of a Sun Belt school if it raises the profile of the conference? Texas spends 140 million or so on athletics...good for them and good for the Big12.
RE: Who is "On Deck" To Replace WKU and keep us at 12?
(03-26-2013 07:47 PM)Campaign4Liberty Wrote:
(03-26-2013 07:43 PM)jimflamesfan Wrote: Arc30inf does have a point. I would think that if Liberty were offered there could be somekind of agreement to play by the same rules...I could see that as a legitimate concern. As far as JMU, I've been to a number of JMU games, they would also be a great addition. I think LU has a better location, we're closer to the Sunbelt schools than JMU. I also believe LU is more up-and-coming. Having said that, JMU has more tradition and a huge stadium. Either would be a good addition, and I think they would both be better options than Jacksonville State or Lamar.
Texas spends 140 million or so on athletics...good for them and good for the Big12.
From this point forth if anyone wants numbers, come to me.
We don't care.
YOU do not care. Others do. Perhaps I posted that moreso to educate my Liberty friends on this board. I do not want false information to permeate these boards.
Count Chocula was never this angry acting. You bad, Count good
(This post was last modified: 03-26-2013 09:07 PM by redfan.)
From this point forth if anyone wants numbers, come to me.
We don't care.
YOU do not care. Others do. Perhaps I posted that moreso to educate my Liberty friends on this board. I do not want false information to permeate these boards.
Count Chocula was never this angry acting. You bad, Count good
RE: Who is "On Deck" To Replace WKU and keep us at 12?
A little bit of a surprise to me, well maybe not, that you all would prefer a school that sells diplomas online on the gov't dime, to real universities like yourselves. Whose next maybe university of phoenix. Maybe Kaplan or devry.
RE: Who is "On Deck" To Replace WKU and keep us at 12?
(03-26-2013 09:14 PM)cleburneslim Wrote: A little bit of a surprise to me, well maybe not, that you all would prefer a school that sells diplomas online on the gov't dime, to real universities like yourselves. Whose next maybe university of phoenix. Maybe Kaplan or devry.
We do not like Count Chocula's school. What made you think that? We know 45000 people in online classes is bad policy. You are wise,we understand too.
RE: Who is "On Deck" To Replace WKU and keep us at 12?
(03-26-2013 09:14 PM)cleburneslim Wrote: A little bit of a surprise to me, well maybe not, that you all would prefer a school that sells diplomas online on the gov't dime, to real universities like yourselves. Whose next maybe university of phoenix. Maybe Kaplan or devry.
/
Who is "On Deck" To Replace WKU and keep us at 12?
