Baylor: It Just Keeps Piling Up.

untjim1995 · May 23, 2017

17 hours ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

Why would SEC schools have any say in the matter? It wouldn't hurt the BXII's feelings if SEC schools lost recruits out of the deal.

Again, that would only be 4 Texas teams. The conference has always had 4 Texas teams.

That certainly makes some sense. On the other hand, I wonder if WVU and the BXII are really committed to each other for the long term. If the BXII picks up Cincy--which would be an inferior add to Houston in almost every other way except the fact that they would provide a good travel companion for WVU--and then WVU bolts to the ACC in the next few years, the BXII will be left with a geographic outlier that is a detriment to the conference.

The ACC has made it very clear, so far, that they want nothing to do with WVU. Maybe that changes, especially if Pitt wants their rival back in a conference with them and can convince the others in the league to support them, but up to this point, the ACC has snubbed its nose at the Mountaineers.

Mean Green 93-98 · May 23, 2017

1 hour ago, untjim1995 said:

The ACC has made it very clear, so far, that they want nothing to do with WVU. Maybe that changes, especially if Pitt wants their rival back in a conference with them and can convince the others in the league to support them, but up to this point, the ACC has snubbed its nose at the Mountaineers.

I never heard anything about that. Back when WVU joined the B12, it was a vastly superior conference to the ACC football-wise. That really isn't true anymore. But the B12 chose WVU over Louisville, and then the ACC took the B12's reject (which actually worked out pretty well for them).

It wouldn't surprise me if the ACC didn't really want WVU, but I've never heard of WVU making serious overtures to them in recent years, and I've not heard anything public from the ACC indicating they didn't want WVU.

untjim1995 · May 23, 2017

1 hour ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

I never heard anything about that. Back when WVU joined the B12, it was a vastly superior conference to the ACC football-wise. That really isn't true anymore. But the B12 chose WVU over Louisville, and then the ACC took the B12's reject (which actually worked out pretty well for them).

It wouldn't surprise me if the ACC didn't really want WVU, but I've never heard of WVU making serious overtures to them in recent years, and I've not heard anything public from the ACC indicating they didn't want WVU.

The ACC is a basketball-league first. Ask anyone who runs that conference and they will take a nano-second to tell you it is UNC, followed closely by Duke. When WVU left for the Big XII, the ACC was fine--until Maryland jumped ship to the B1G. Once that happened, they had to get another option and Louisville beat out UConn, Cincy, and USF. Louisville had a solid football team, but it was their basketball program that made them a good fit and their baseball team is also stellar. Now, Petrino is back and they are great again in football, while Pitino still has them rolling in basketball, too.

There is no way that the ACC would've taken WVU if Maryland had left first--they would have gone after Pitt or Syracuse first, then probably added the other with Louisville later. WVU was probably behind UConn, as well. The Virginia schools and the North Carolina schools look down at WVU because of its party school reputation, fan behavior, and its lousy academics.

Mean Green 93-98 · May 23, 2017

48 minutes ago, untjim1995 said:

. . . then probably added the other with Louisville later. WVU was probably behind UConn, as well. The Virginia schools and the North Carolina schools look down at WVU because of its party school reputation, fan behavior, and its lousy academics.

The previous part of your post qualifies as speculative possibility, but this part is out of the question. At least at the time, both the B12 and the ACC would have taken WVU over Louisville. The academics between the two are about even (as in not great), but WVU is historically much stronger athletically.

Mean Green 93-98 · May 24, 2017

A CBS writer is calling for Baylor to give up its football program voluntarily.

Quote

Let's cut to the chase. Within the horror and evil revealed in the latest lawsuit involving Baylor University and its disgraced football program is a hard truth: It's time for the immediate and permanent dismantling of Baylor football.

Shutter it.

Banish it from existence.

Right now.

http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/baylor-must-end-its-football-team-and-put-morality-over-money-goodness-over-glory/

UNTFan23 · May 25, 2017

16 hours ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

A CBS writer is calling for Baylor to give up its football program voluntarily.

http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/baylor-must-end-its-football-team-and-put-morality-over-money-goodness-over-glory/

No way any university would voluntarily shutter its biggest and most visible program -- football.

GrayEagle · May 25, 2017

I agree that Baylor will not voluntarily close down football (nor should they). However, to appease some of their supporters who believe in adherence to Christian values, I would like to see Baylor take a self-imposed one year moratorium on their football program. Most of the perpetrators have been dismissed and the football program (especially) should be closely monitored for years to come. An in-house investigation should be conducted and all paid personnel who had knowledge of the unlawful events and didn't report it should be fired as well. Any players who took part should be permanently dismissed from the university.

Baylor used to have very strict standards and they need to return to those moral values as an example for other Christian institutions.

VideoEagle · May 25, 2017

1 minute ago, GrayEagle said:

I agree that Baylor will not voluntarily close down football (nor should they). However, to appease some of their supporters who believe in adherence to Christian values, I would like to see Baylor take a self-imposed one year moratorium on their football program. Most of the perpetrators have been dismissed and the football program (especially) should be closely monitored for years to come. An in-house investigation should be conducted and all paid personnel who had knowledge of the unlawful events and didn't report it should be fired as well. Any players who took part should be permanently dismissed from the university.

Baylor used to have very strict standards and they need to return to those moral values as an example for other Christian institutions.

I'm curious what you mean by "self-imposed one year moratorium on their football program?" Is that a self imposed one year death penalty? That wouldn't just hurt Baylor but every Big XII school with a lack of conference games, a drop in strength of schedules that would hurt others chances at the playoff and a potential hit to the conference TV money for a reduction in the total number of games available for broadcast. I think they should do the rest of your suggestions.

DT 90 · May 25, 2017

26 minutes ago, VideoEagle said:

I'm curious what you mean by "self-imposed one year moratorium on their football program?" Is that a self imposed one year death penalty? That wouldn't just hurt Baylor but every Big XII school with a lack of conference games, a drop in strength of schedules that would hurt others chances at the playoff and a potential hit to the conference TV money for a reduction in the total number of games available for broadcast. I think they should do the rest of your suggestions.

Not going to happen. They wouldn't do that to their new coach. They are running a tight ship along the lines of BYU right now. However, the conference is withholding 25% of the conference payouts.

http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=10410&ATCLID=211461596

Edited May 25, 2017 by DT 90

GrandGreen · May 25, 2017

1 hour ago, DT 90 said:

Not going to happen. They wouldn't do that to their new coach. They are running a tight ship along the lines of BYU right now. However, the conference is withholding 25% of the conference payouts.

http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=10410&ATCLID=211461596

Tighter than after every other one of their scandals. I would not believe anything that Baylor put forth.

Edited May 25, 2017 by GrandGreen

UNTLifer · May 25, 2017

The biggest difference to me vs. what SMU did in the 80's, is that SMU didn't hurt anyone in the process, outside of the 5 hookers. Baylor's issues have hurt a number of young women and their acts were criminal. My other issue with Baylor is that it appears the cover up ran all the way to the top including their Board.

Ben Gooding · May 26, 2017

20 hours ago, UNTLifer said:

The biggest difference to me vs. what SMU did in the 80's, is that SMU didn't hurt anyone in the process, outside of the 5 hookers. Baylor's issues have hurt a number of young women and their acts were criminal. My other issue with Baylor is that it appears the cover up ran all the way to the top including their Board.

If this is true, hammer needs to be dropped with heavy force.