sous vide
Member
Trust me: You really do not want them. Really. Or don't trust me. Go to www.baylorfans.com and read for a while.
Now Baylor's Anxious
- Thread starter 60s Frog
- Start date
Trust me: You really do not want them. Really. Or don't trust me. Go to www.baylorfans.com and read for a while.
TCUFrogs
New Member
This quote from the article is worth bringing up again:
"And, of course, there is the great pride that we feel as Texans when our teams dominate the national collegiate athletics landscape as they did during the past year."
Which Texas teams dominated the national collegiate athletics landscape last year? From the big 12?
"And, of course, there is the great pride that we feel as Texans when our teams dominate the national collegiate athletics landscape as they did during the past year."
Which Texas teams dominated the national collegiate athletics landscape last year? From the big 12?
weklfrog
New Member
Would you want a team in your conference that had to debase themselves so thoroughly because they were unable to compete on the field?
TCUFrogs
New Member
"In the spirit of the venerable biblical tradition, if we have issues to resolve, let us resolve them together. Decisions that impact our state's largest higher education institutions and their many constituents, as well as our economy and quality of life, ought to be reviewed thoughtfully..."
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
The biblical tradition?
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
The biblical tradition?
froginaustin
Active Member
weklfrog
New Member
the closest, as much as I hate to say it, would be aggie, who won national championships in women's basketball, men's and women's outdoor track, and a sweet 16 for men's basketball, not that any of that matters.
West Coast Johnny
Full Member
We're pragmatic here, and we improve conferences that we are members of. If your hypothetical situation came to fruition, we would evaluate Baylor's application for membership in light of other availalble schools along business lines.
West Coast Johnny
Full Member
Per the Houston Comical - Drayton's interest in the Bears will last about as long as the Big 12's interest in the Bears. No Big 12 - No Stadium.
Duquesne Frog
Member
Ten reasons why the answer is hell no.
1) Baylor is Temple, except a small private school with no media market whatsoever, so it doesn't even have whatever nominal tangible advantages that Temple has.
2) Baylor was given the same opportunity that USF was given, except better, with even more cash. And what has Baylor done with it? Baylor has been far, far worse since joining the Big 12 than it was before, not that it was a world-beater in the SWC, not because of superior competition, which is what they'd have you believe, but because they pissed away their ample financial resources, made terrible coaching decisions, and for the most part, gave up on any desire to field anything other than an embarrassment of a football program.
3) And all the while, their fans and administration have prostrated themselves at the altar of Big 12 superiority despite having absolutely NOTHING to do with that superiority, staking their identity not on themselves but on being in the same conference as Texas and Oklahoma. And what's worse is that they have fooled themselves into a sense of entitlement over being in that conference, so much so that they lobby legislators and threaten lawsuits if they see a chance their gravy train may cease.
4) Pertaining to (3) did you see how part of their plaintive cry to the Texas Legislature is that A&M leaving the Big 12 will hurt "sacred rivalries" and economically hurt schools like Baylor. And they wallow in this hypocrisy while knowing deep in their cold, shallow, soulless hearts that they didn't give a DaMN about sacred rivalries or economic impact when they used political power to threaten Texas and Texas A&M not to leave them in 1995 and cast longtime rivals TCU, SMU and Rice out into the Dead Sea.
5) Baylor has some decent to great non-revenue sports, but those sports have been supported at the teets of Texas and OU, not from any merit they've earned themselves. TCU has decent to great non-revenue sports AND a great football program, and ALL of it has been earned, and earned the hard way, with a fraction of the TV revenue, a fraction of the TV exposure, with the inherent recruiting disadvantages of non-BCS conferences, devoting resources to finding new homes every time a conference fell apart around us.
6) Given Baylor's administrative mindset and assuming that mindset would have remained consistent had THEY been left for dead in the WAC, they would be Rice right now, without the academic cred.
7) http://en.wikipedia...._Polanyi_Center
8)
9) Baylor sucks.
10) A lot.
Does this sufficiently answer your question?
gohornedfrogs
Tier 1
Ten reasons why the answer is hell no.
1) Baylor is Temple, except a small private school with no media market whatsoever, so it doesn't even have whatever nominal tangible advantages that Temple has.
2) Baylor was given the same opportunity that USF was given, except better, with even more cash. And what has Baylor done with it? Baylor has been far, far worse since joining the Big 12 than it was before, not that it was a world-beater in the SWC, not because of superior competition, which is what they'd have you believe, but because they pissed away their ample financial resources, made terrible coaching decisions, and for the most part, gave up on any desire to field anything other than an embarrassment of a football program.
3) And all the while, their fans and administration have prostrated themselves at the altar of Big 12 superiority despite having absolutely NOTHING to do with that superiority, staking their identity not on themselves but on being in the same conference as Texas and Oklahoma. And what's worse is that they have fooled themselves into a sense of entitlement over being in that conference, so much so that they lobby legislators and threaten lawsuits if they see a chance their gravy train may cease.
4) Pertaining to (3) did you see how part of their plaintive cry to the Texas Legislature is that A&M leaving the Big 12 will hurt "sacred rivalries" and economically hurt schools like Baylor. And they wallow in this hypocrisy while knowing deep in their cold, shallow, soulless hearts that they didn't give a DaMN about sacred rivalries or economic impact when they used political power to threaten Texas and Texas A&M not to leave them in 1995 and cast longtime rivals TCU, SMU and Rice out into the Dead Sea.
5) Baylor has some decent to great non-revenue sports, but those sports have been supported at the teets of Texas and OU, not from any merit they've earned themselves. TCU has decent to great non-revenue sports AND a great football program, and ALL of it has been earned, and earned the hard way, with a fraction of the TV revenue, a fraction of the TV exposure, with the inherent recruiting disadvantages of non-BCS conferences, devoting resources to finding new homes every time a conference fell apart around us.
6) Given Baylor's administrative mindset and assuming that mindset would have remained consistent had THEY been left for dead in the WAC, they would be Rice right now, without the academic cred.
7) http://en.wikipedia...._Polanyi_Center
8)
9) Baylor sucks.
10) A lot.
Does this sufficiently answer your question?
+ Eleventy Gazillion
I sooo knew that answer but its much more entertaining to get it straight from yall. I feel about Central Florida the way the frogs feel about Baylor. The rivalry isnt nearly as long but the amount that I loath thier fans has to be similar.... There are some great quotes in that post!
I want the 4 northern schools (ok, I dont really want K st, but we all know we have to take them) One school in Florida, One in Texas, 1 missou, 1 Iowa and wish it was 1 in Kansas. Were not the ACC we dont need overlap! (but I still like Houston...MWC hopefully!)
I want the 4 northern schools (ok, I dont really want K st, but we all know we have to take them) One school in Florida, One in Texas, 1 missou, 1 Iowa and wish it was 1 in Kansas. Were not the ACC we dont need overlap! (but I still like Houston...MWC hopefully!)
gohornedfrogs
Tier 1
And today Kenneth Starr has a different op-Ed in USA Today.
Pathetic.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2011-08-17-college-conferences-ncaa-texas_n.htm
Pathetic.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2011-08-17-college-conferences-ncaa-texas_n.htm
PurplFrawg
Administrator
Ken Starr answers the question posed by media:
"What are Baylor's chances of winding up in another BCS conference?"
"What are Baylor's chances of winding up in another BCS conference?"
Screaming Flea
New Member
This one is worth re--posting! Baylor has been doing this for about 20 years. It's no big deal for them now.
Mike Brooks
New Member
There is not a more dooshtastic University President in the Country than this azzhat. He is succeeding in making Baylor the biggest joke in the Nation.
Deep Purple
Full Member
Illuminating. Thanks. So if I understand the situation correctly, Baylor is still a wealthy university with good cash flow, and over the long term their debt is manageable. But in the short term, it's putting a real bite on their liquidity.
Is that a fair assessment, or am I just showing my financial ignorance?
As for the history of Baylor's indebtedness, I'll give you the Cliff Notes version...
In 2001 Baylor's president Robert Sloan launched a 10-year campaign called "Baylor 2012" that was supposed to push Baylor to "the top tier of American universities while reaffirming and deepening its distinctive Christian mission." The campaign was to dramatically expand Baylor's academic programs, develop its campus, and build a $2 billion institutional endowment.
Pushed by those goals, in 2002 Baylor raised its tuition by 35-40%. That's where the Law of Unintended Consequences kicked in. The huge tuition increase triggered a major drop in applications, causing Baylor to miss its admission recruiting goals for several consecutive years afterward, which reduced student revenue.
During the same period, Baylor issued over $180 million in university bonds to finance a massive building campaign envisioned by Sloan. They built a lavish half-million square-foot science building that cost about as much as TCU spent on the BLUU and the entire Campus Commons, including all four residence halls. They built new residence halls. They built parking garages disguised as academic buildings -- a great idea if you can afford it, but substantially more costly than unadorned garages. But the real problem was, Baylor was building purely on credit, not with cash in-hand or promissory (in the form of gift pledges paid out over a term of years). Fundraising is a slow, uncertain process, and Sloan apparently wanted those buildings NOW, not next decade.
By contrast, TCU rarely spends money purely on credit. When we raise money for a building (or a stadium), much of that is in the form of multi-year pledges. Since we need the cash up-front to build, we take on short-term bridge loans and repay them with the payments on pledged donations. In the case of revenue-producing buildings (such as residence halls or the BLUU), we may issue university bonds and retire that debt over the long term with the revenue generated by those buildings. In other words, even when TCU borrows, it's usually revenue-neutral borrowing.
This is not what Baylor did -- at least for the most part. They took on long-term debt purely on credit, with no anticipated revenue offset. This became a problem when the huge tuition increase wrecked the admission goals, and student revenues were cut dramatically at the very time when Baylor needed increased revenue to service massive debt. In all, Baylor took on $274.1 million in debt via bond issues in 2002 and 2006. This placed such strain on their budget, full financial crisis resulted. College and department budgets were slashed. Scores of faculty and staff were laid off. In 2008, Baylor offered a third bond issue for $115 million to retire older debt and replace it with more easily serviceable new debt. Probably a wise move at the time, when cash was so tight. But of course, servicing debt with debt is not a highly regarded long-term strategy, and Baylor's bond rating took a hit.
Throughout all this, Baylor's Board of Regents was getting increasingly restive. It started in 2002 with just one Regent, who was appalled at the massive tuition increase. Sloan-backers on the Board tried to oust her, asking her to resign, but she refused. They threatened impeachment, but she held her ground. As Baylor's financial woes deepened, more Regents began to come around to her way of thinking, creating a disaffected faction on the Board. In their view, Sloan's fiscal mismanagement was running the university into the ground.
Eventually, the faction became a majority. In 2004, 22 of 36 Regents formed the Committee to Restore Integrity to Baylor (CRIB), and they forced Sloan's resignation in 2005. Though Sloan is gone, his legacy remains. The 10-year "Baylor 2012" plan is a wreck, with only 4 months remaining and fewer than half its goals met. And as of 2010, Baylor was still servicing close to $320 million in long-term debt.
Frog Attack II
Active Member
Ten reasons why the answer is hell no.
1) Baylor is Temple, except a small private school with no media market whatsoever, so it doesn't even have whatever nominal tangible advantages that Temple has.
2) Baylor was given the same opportunity that USF was given, except better, with even more cash. And what has Baylor done with it? Baylor has been far, far worse since joining the Big 12 than it was before, not that it was a world-beater in the SWC, not because of superior competition, which is what they'd have you believe, but because they pissed away their ample financial resources, made terrible coaching decisions, and for the most part, gave up on any desire to field anything other than an embarrassment of a football program.
3) And all the while, their fans and administration have prostrated themselves at the altar of Big 12 superiority despite having absolutely NOTHING to do with that superiority, staking their identity not on themselves but on being in the same conference as Texas and Oklahoma. And what's worse is that they have fooled themselves into a sense of entitlement over being in that conference, so much so that they lobby legislators and threaten lawsuits if they see a chance their gravy train may cease.
4) Pertaining to (3) did you see how part of their plaintive cry to the Texas Legislature is that A&M leaving the Big 12 will hurt "sacred rivalries" and economically hurt schools like Baylor. And they wallow in this hypocrisy while knowing deep in their cold, shallow, soulless hearts that they didn't give a DaMN about sacred rivalries or economic impact when they used political power to threaten Texas and Texas A&M not to leave them in 1995 and cast longtime rivals TCU, SMU and Rice out into the Dead Sea.
5) Baylor has some decent to great non-revenue sports, but those sports have been supported at the teets of Texas and OU, not from any merit they've earned themselves. TCU has decent to great non-revenue sports AND a great football program, and ALL of it has been earned, and earned the hard way, with a fraction of the TV revenue, a fraction of the TV exposure, with the inherent recruiting disadvantages of non-BCS conferences, devoting resources to finding new homes every time a conference fell apart around us.
6) Given Baylor's administrative mindset and assuming that mindset would have remained consistent had THEY been left for dead in the WAC, they would be Rice right now, without the academic cred.
7) http://en.wikipedia...._Polanyi_Center
8)
9) Baylor sucks.
10) A lot.
Does this sufficiently answer your question?
One of the greatest posts ever!
This needs to be pinned & read daily between now & 1st game.
Watching some tools from the gay Baylor Line parade a sign in front of my fam / kids that said "this sign is worth more than your entire conference" just makes me seethe.... well, karma is a beotch boys!
FrogRails
Full Member
I remember seeing that sign at the last baylor-TCU game in Waco. Made my blood boil too. But it sure didn't appear much after the epic Marcus Jackson to Aaron Brown TD pass that put us up for good...
I made the mistake of going to baylorfans. A few of them are comparing Starr's piece in USA Today to Travis' famous letter written during the siege of the Alamo. I've never felt the anger toward Baylor so many others do, but reading their comments trying to equate their frantic scramble for survival with one of history's foremost examples of courage and honor made me throw up in my mouth a little bit.
