(cont. from previous post) 3. CULTURAL FIT: The Pac-10 requires
unanimous votes to enact new policies. The church leadership [of which I am a
member] has in it's recent and distant past been guilty of exercising their own
brand of bigotry [getting involved in California's Prop 8, discrimination
against Blacks, patriarchal misogyny,...]. And since ybU receives their marching
orders from the church, it seems pretty reasonable to me for them to want to
block out a maverick school who would likely tarnish their image with continued
behavior not consistent with academia. This is the same school that blocked a
Rodin exhibit because a nude sculpture was determined too purient. The Pac-10
doesn't hate Mormons. They hate ybU and it's repressive leadership. Utah is a
secular school who is not beholden to the General Authorities. Edge: Utah.
Okay...so THERE's a couple MORE reasons why ybU will not be
considered for expansion. They fell behind the Utes in all three arenas. All
things considered, Utah was/(is) the far better choice. GO
Re: bostonblueIt isn't all about bigotry, read the following posted
by Naval Vet. 3 reasons why the PAC-10 prefers Utah over BYU.1.
ACADEMIC FIT. Utah is a Tier 1 Research institution [the Medical school is an
added bonus], and one who has NOT been censored by the AAUP. ybU is NOT a
Research school, and HAS been academically censored. Edge: Utah.
2. ATHLETIC FIT: Utah has 2 BCS bowl trophies in the last 6 years, has the most
wins over teams from AQ conferences than any other non-AQ school, and is amid a
9-game postseason win streak. The tdS hasn't been to a meaningful bowl game
since 1996, is ranked behind Utah, TCU, and Navy [tied with Fresno St.] in wins
over BCS school competition, and has won only 4 of their last 9 postseason
games. Edge: Utah.(cont.)
Utah will go PAC. The big question: why? The reason(s) for expansion: MONEY?
Add athletics, and even academics. A BIGGER WHY??MONEY:BYU
will always bring more MONEY than Utah! BYU has filled its 65,000 capacity most
of the last 30 years. Utah has trouble filling its recently expanded
45,000--unless playing BYU! At UCLA, 40% of the fans were BYU fans. Same thing
at Washington. In PAC country, that will always be the case. That won't happen
EVER with Utah, let alone every game!Utah Football was non-existent
until Urban and a BYU PLAYER decided to coach there. Still, BYU controls the
last 5 years!Same TV market? Are you kidding?! BYU will always
pull more viewers even in Utah. But, BYU has 7 Million North American Mormons!
The BYU potential TV audience is one of the nation's largest. Utah will NEVER
compete with MONEY.ATHLETICS:BYU: 30 years of a nationally
recognized program, national championship, heisman, NFL MVPs, better facilities.
Director's Cup #26. Utah: Women's gymnastics, and a few years of
football. Director's Cup #57.ACADEMICS: BYU undergrad,
Business, Law superior.So WHY?? PAC Bigotry.
Alright here is an an idea...just an idea I say, but the question is, why hasn't
the pac-10 contacted Utah? With news of the Big 12 staying at 10 teams there
is further news that they may petition the NCAA to change the "old time" rule of
12 teams for a championship game. Could the Pac-10 be waiting to add Utah just
in case the NCAA changes the rule. If they don't need twelve, why add Utah.
Less schools, more money for each school. Just a thought......
"So where did all the money suddenly come from to keep the Big 12 together? Why
wasn't the money there before?"Scott1, There is a lot of
good ‘ol boys down in Texas who are putting a bunch of new money into the
Big 12 (10) kitty. The see a revenue bonanza by having a Texas TV deal.
I think you're taking the word "literal" too literally. Words are used how
they're used, and that changes over time. Beebe saved the current situation of
college football by sticking it to the Pac-10 (well, I guess Texas stuck it to
the Pac-10) and keeping status quo. What a feat. College football may be corrupt
and full of issues at this moment, but I'd rather stay in the frying pan and not
jump into the fire of super conferences. We'll see how the next few years play
out. In the mean time, we all oughta send thank you notes to Beebe for keeping
the Big 12 minus 2 together for the time being.
From the story: "He literally lifted up a dead league and gave it life."You mean Beebe actually bent over, reached down to the floor with his
hands where the Big 12 Conference was sitting, and used his muscles to pick it
up, and then miraculously bestowed it with vital force?? Were there actual
witnesses to this unsual event? Who was your source?Let's all band
together to stop the misuse of the word "literally." You'd think edited
newspaper stories would get it right.
So where did all the money suddenly come from to keep the Big 12 together? Why
wasn't the money there before?
For there to be super teams there must also be enablers. UT-Austin and OU-Norman
fight it out most years but they have to have OSU, TT and A&M and other teams to
be good but not good enough. Every conference has some weak and mediocre teams
that benefit from being in the conference but are really enablers of the elites.
Realignment was based mostly on TV revenues. The Big 12 North is
mostly plains and not big TV audiences.Texas can now have the best
of both worlds. They are like ND but also have a conference full of enablers to
prop up their dynasty. OU, TT and A&M might beat them once in a while but not
often enough to really lose them any revenue. It may take some time
but teams with strong enough TV demand will go the route of Texas. The rules on
coverage will be rewritten in favor of the haves at the expense of the
conferences. The MTN Conference TV contract is way out of date.