Would You Want To Be Baylor?

emmitt01 · May 13, 2009

I'm watching college football live right now and they're discussing whether the non-AQ conferences deserve to have at least 1 guaranteed a spot in the BCS. So, with this in mind, would you accept the following scenario. Assume that we are to be in the SBC for a long time. The "non-BCS" conferences are guaranteed at least 1 team in a BCS bowl and Troy or FAU go at least once every 5 years. Would you be happy if the SBC had these two teams consistently in the top 15, dominating the Belt year in and year out? Remember that our share of the money would be sizeable. This would mean that we would never win the Belt but we could make the Baylor argument of "yeah, but we play in the Sun Belt!"

Which is more important, the chance to win our conference or the ability to pound our chests and talk about how great our conference is?

*******No, the have your cake and eat it too option is not available*****************

oldguystudent · May 13, 2009

I dunno. All the members of the SEC who aren't LSU or Georgia seem pretty happy with the "But our conference" argument. How else do they always get 47 post season bids in every sport?

Censored by Laurie · May 13, 2009

Do we get Baylor's other programs?

medpilot21 · May 13, 2009

I have to say the "Baylor in the Big-XII" thing has little merit with me. SMU has tried that in several conferences now, and moving out does not mean moving up? Being the door-mat of a BCS conference doesnt equate at all with winning a conference title...in ANY conference. Thanks to all the BCS loyalists, but keep your money. I'll take my trip to New Orleans when we earn it in the SBC.

GMG!!!

NT03 · May 13, 2009

Yes for 1 reason and 1 reason only : Robert Griffin

gangrene · May 13, 2009

Do we get Robert Griffin and Art Briles?

emmitt01 · May 13, 2009

Not literally be Baylor, I meant to be "good by association."

NT03 · May 13, 2009

Not literally be Baylor, I meant to be "good by association."

Everybody panic! Oh my God, there's a bear loose in the coliseum! There will be no refunds! Your refund will be escaping this deathtrap with your life! If you have a small child, use it as a shield! They love the tender meat! Cover your sodas!Dewie loves sugar!

But no really , I would literally want to be Baylor :ph34r: .....unless we are lining up against a guy called Booger than No or we were out shooting guns on a farm in Waco than No too

Edited May 13, 2009 by NT03

NT80 · May 13, 2009

Would I want UNT to have Baylor's place in the Big 12? Absolutely. They get million$ just by association and are treated like royalty by the media being in the BCS in Texas even though they are usually mincemeat. They have a built-in great schedule for all sports plus if they finish 6-6 they go Bowling somewhere. Bring it on! The SBC is what it is, a home to those who can't afford real housing. Maybe someday we can move up the foodchain. <_<

emmitt01 · May 14, 2009

Would I want UNT to have Baylor's place in the Big 12? Absolutely. They get million$ just by association and are treated like royalty by the media being in the BCS in Texas even though they are usually mincemeat. They have a built-in great schedule for all sports plus if they finish 6-6 they go Bowling somewhere. Bring it on! The SBC is what it is, a home to those who can't afford real housing. Maybe someday we can move up the foodchain.

Ok, using the scenario I actually laid out...would you want that?

KRAM1 · May 14, 2009

Can I get an "Amen" and a baseball team??

NO! :no:

UNTLifer · May 14, 2009

Ok, using the scenario I actually laid out...would you want that?

No. I would rather win conference on a regular basis and let Troy, FAU, or whoever ride our coat tails and cash checks we earn for them.

kingwoodgreen · May 14, 2009

Being in a great conference. One that brings in alot of money for football and other programs. Good rivals and teams that bring fans to the games. A great schedule that will awaken the "potenital" (or at least put that theory to rest) alums to reconnect. But being mediocre in football while having other programs being good to great ala Baylor.

oh yea, I would take it in a heartbeat.

foutsrouts · May 14, 2009

No, because I would have to live in Waco. Even Mary Hardin left town.

TIgreen01 · May 14, 2009

Seems like a ridiculous question to me. Baylor doesn't even want to be "Baylor"---or what the word means to college football. You think they are content in just being in last place in the Big 12 South every year so they can collect a check and spend it on other sports?

UNT90 · May 14, 2009

I just want thier coach.

KRAM1 · May 14, 2009

I just want thier coach.

Why? What's he won at Baylor? On the other hand, Griffin at QB will make him look good for a few years and maybe help recruit a few decent players to the program. Having a more competitive Baylor would help the Big XII, and Baylor does look to be on the "upswing" because they have what looks to be a good new young QB. Hmmmmmmmmm...sort of like UNT's new young QB perhaps, but Griffen has had the opportunity to show his skills and abilities on the college level. What Riley can and will do remains to be seen. But, a great young QB with lots of potential sure can't hurt a program and goes a long way in making a coach look good.

gangrene · May 14, 2009

I've got tired head from this analogy!

Would I want to trade places with Baylor and get our butts kicked by Big XII teams every year? Yes, most definitely, because I think that scenario would make us better in a few years. We'd have more money and better recruits simply by our association with the Big XII. Baylor hasn't made the most of their opportunity in the Big XII but I think it's only a matter of time before that changes...they will upset a few teams this season. See Texas Tech for an example of how to maximize your opportunity within a tough conference. The Big XII is, arguably, one of the two best football conferences in the country and has had several teams consistently ranked in the top 10 over the last few years.

This would mean that we would never win the Belt but we could make the Baylor argument of "yeah, but we play in the Sun Belt!"

Maybe I lack vision, but I simply can't imagine the "yeah, but we play in the Sun Belt" comment ever having as much credibility as the "yeah, but we play in the Big XII" comment. And, I hope I never see the day when we have given up all hope of ever winning the Belt again, although that thought doesn't seem too unrealistic right now.

Which is more important, the chance to win our conference or the ability to pound our chests and talk about how great our conference is?

Again, I'm struggling with the choices here because it matters greatly which conference we're in before determining which is more important. It wasn't too long ago that we won four consecutive Sun Belt titles. I don't remember any of my friends or national and/or local media being very impressed by that accomplishment. And it certainly didn't seem to impress any of our potential recruits. Even if we were guaranteed an SBC invite to the conference winner, I don't see how that, alone, would change the perception of the quality of our conference. The MWC has been pretty competitive on the football field the last few years and everyone remembers Boise St. upsetting OU a few years ago, but I don't see that the reputation of the WAC or MWC has been elevated much as a whole. Most college football analysts would rank the MWC and WAC as the 5th and 6th best football conferences.

So, my answer is, without a doubt...I'd have to choose being the cellar dweller in the great conference (considered great by those who matter) vs. the chance to win a crappy conference. I simply don't buy the argument that Baylor will never win the Big XII or that UNT could never win the Big XII, if we were in that position. Right now it looks pretty hopeless for Baylor but that could all change eventually. Aside from a few perennial powerhouses (USC, Texas, OU, etc) winning in major conferences tends to be very cyclical. Texas A & M is down now and Texas and OU have both had extended slumps over the last 20 years. Ask any OU fan about the John Blake days (and then run). Look at the SEC - ten years ago I would have never thought that Arkansas would be awful and South Carolina would be able to hire Steve Spurrier. Even Vanderbilt and Kentucky are capable of upsetting good conference foes on any given week. I'd definitely take a chance to win one of those conferences over a chance to win the SBC anytime.

oldguystudent · May 14, 2009

I'm obviously a big follower of the Big West conference. Back when it was still a football conference, I rarely had any idea who won the title each year. They played in some fifth rate bowl, Las Vegas I think, and nobody cared. Hate to call a spade a spade, but this is pretty much how I see the Sunbelt today. I heard of North Texas once briefly when I randomly turned on the TV and they talked about Patrick Cobbs for a second before the New Orleans bowl. Other than that, 12 months ago, I'd quite literally never heard of most of the Sunbelt schools. I've always known about Baylor, SMU, and TCU from the old Southwest days. So if nothing else, for purposes of brand recognition, I'd rather have the major conference affiliation.

untjim1995 · May 18, 2009

Here are my thoughts on a very interesting topic, but involving a Baylor vs. UNT comparison. I know that the comparison is supposed to be with us in the SBC as the role of Baylor, but the view that Baylor should ever move out of the Big XII will never occur becasue of the following listing.

Pros for being Baylor:

1. Money--lots of it and its mostly guaranteed. No downside--only gets higher if the Big XII gets two teams in the BCS games or if you make a bowl game and get additional monies from the game.

2. Prestige--Being in a BCS conference alone adds much more credibility than anyone can challenge. For example, everyone at TCU would die to get into a AQ-BCS league that played local schools. As a matter of fact, Baylor made more bowl money last year by being in the BCS than TCU made for beating Boise State and finishing in the Top Ten. That alone still drives me crazy, but it makes the point.

3. Image--Both in the state and in the national media, Baylor gets more attention just because of who they play in conference. Recruits who like a smaller school and can get playing time early would probably feel like Baylor's situation could be a great fit.

Cons for being Baylor:

1. Loser Mentality--this description is awfully hard to get rid of. As a matter of fact, their fans are so excited because last year they beat A&M and went 4-8. That's the tough part about playing in the Big XII South every year.

2. Apathy--alumni and administration always have the crutch to lean on and say, "Hey, we can't beat OU, Texas, Nebraska, etc..so it really isn't a big deal if we go 3-9 every year."

For obvious reasons, I won't go into the breakdown of being UNT and in the SBC--the Pros are almost non-existent when compared to anyone else in Texas. I would take their place or anyone in CUSA for that matter in a heartbeat. The real question I have is why the non AQ-BCS schools in Texas do not want to be aligned with UNT in a conference still to this day? I understand the past with the SWC, butI just don't get why that view is still in play when UTEP is easily accepted. I just don't get it.