Expansion w/Baylor not Colorado?

[Boom]

Mukden - It appears that your making a lot of assumptions about "religious" schools and what they teach. Do you know for a fact that they claim the earth is only 6,000 yrs old? I doubt it..... whats next are you going to tell me they think evolution is fake?

[Duckattack7]

I like the Texas and Oklahoma schools. As for the 6th school, I would be okay with Colorado, Utah or TCU. I doubt any of those except Colorado would happen though.

(I told myself I didn't want any religious schools, but then I thought about Texas CHRISTIAN and how I wanted them in. Plus, have you seen their cheerleaders?)

Yes I have!

Can we just start inviting schools based on how hot their cheerleaders are?

We get them and their knee high boots every other year in SLC.

I dont know about you guys but them Oregon cheerleaders are the hottest, Has anyone seen them?

[Elduderino]

Wow, thanks Mukden, for coming on here and totally ruining this thread. I love it when supposed "open minded" people show how intolerant they really are to other beliefs. Now if C4Q can manage to find a few more just like you we can change the name to educk, and have no real sports talk just have every thread ruined by stupid politics and religion. I pretty sure 99% of us come to talk sports, and we would rather leave all religion and politics out of it. I think I speak for the majority here when I say STFU and if you don't have anything to add to the topic at hand don't post.

I think the subject is entirely relevant to the discussion. It may have gotten sidetracked a little, but the debate here is over the inclusion of a inherently religious institution to the Pac 10; and personally I think these are viable questions to ask.
Now I have a unique perspective on this, having spent my childhood/early adolesence in the Texas Hill Country and personally knowing many Baylor alums. I also come from a family that primarily
attended one of the "elite" religious institutions in the country; so I've
got some idea about how the people are at Baylor specifically, and the
culture of religious educational institutions in general.

Let me just start by saying that the Baylor alums I know are very good people and would make out well in the Pac 10. I can see how some might get the "in your face Baptist" vibe; but I got that during my time at UO as well. Now from an education standpoint, there is a valid point to be made regarding research/science. There is a fundamental difference in mindset and in the approach to instruction and course intent. How can there not be? That being said, a religious background does not disqualify an institution from being academically elite. Can they not teach calculus, economics, history, political science, anatomy, biology, chemistry, business, agriculture, etc...right up there with the best of them? (They Do).

I understand a desire to want to keep the conference a secular entity. I think that culturally, there is a very valid point to be had. I just don't believe that religion as it relates to academic quality, is a viable reason to object to Baylor's inclusion in the conference.

[shear_j]

My God who gives a f*ck what religion they are. I come to this board to talk and read about football not listen to people bang their heads together talking about s*** like religion or politics. I'd love to come onto this thread and read about the pro's and con's about Colorado and Baylor and who each person prefers. Can't we just agree that nobody is gonna change the others mind and start talking about sports again, please?

[greenyellow]

Wow, thanks Mukden, for coming on here and totally ruining this thread. I love it when supposed "open minded" people show how intolerant they really are to other beliefs. Now if C4Q can manage to find a few more just like you we can change the name to educk, and have no real sports talk just have every thread ruined by stupid politics and religion. I pretty sure 99% of us come to talk sports, and we would rather leave all religion and politics out of it. I think I speak for the majority here when I say STFU and if you don't have anything to add to the topic at hand don't post.

I think the subject is entirely relevant to the discussion. It may have gotten sidetracked a little, but the debate here is over the inclusion of a inherently religious institution to the Pac 10; and personally I think these are viable questions to ask.
Now I have a unique perspective on this, having spent my childhood/early adolesence in the Texas Hill Country and personally knowing many Baylor alums. I also come from a family that primarily
attended one of the "elite" religious institutions in the country; so I've
got some idea about how the people are at Baylor specifically, and the
culture of religious educational institutions in general.

Let me just start by saying that the Baylor alums I know are very good people and would make out well in the Pac 10. I can see how some might get the "in your face Baptist" vibe; but I got that during my time at UO as well. Now from an education standpoint, there is a valid point to be made regarding research/science. There is a fundamental difference in mindset and in the approach to instruction and course intent. How can there not be? That being said, a religious background does not disqualify an institution from being academically elite. Can they not teach calculus, economics, history, political science, anatomy, biology, chemistry, business, agriculture, etc...right up there with the best of them? (They Do).

I understand a desire to want to keep the conference a secular entity. I think that culturally, there is a very valid point to be had. I just don't believe that religion as it relates to academic quality, is a viable reason to object to Baylor's inclusion in the conference.

Agree on everything said there. People who are religious can learn and teach just as well as someone who isn't. They just come at it with a different perspective, which is great for students since it makes them think outside of their normal way of thinking or it reinforces their already held beliefs. The inclusion of a school into the Pac-10 should be heavily be determined by what they bring to table athletically since this expansion is for athletic teams, not academics or religious affiliations.

[Boom]

Wow, thanks Mukden, for coming on here and totally ruining this thread. I love it when supposed "open minded" people show how intolerant they really are to other beliefs. Now if C4Q can manage to find a few more just like you we can change the name to educk, and have no real sports talk just have every thread ruined by stupid politics and religion. I pretty sure 99% of us come to talk sports, and we would rather leave all religion and politics out of it. I think I speak for the majority here when I say STFU and if you don't have anything to add to the topic at hand don't post.

I think the subject is entirely relevant to the discussion. It may have gotten sidetracked a little, but the debate here is over the inclusion of a inherently religious institution to the Pac 10; and personally I think these are viable questions to ask.
Now I have a unique perspective on this, having spent my childhood/early adolesence in the Texas Hill Country and personally knowing many Baylor alums. I also come from a family that primarily
attended one of the "elite" religious institutions in the country; so I've
got some idea about how the people are at Baylor specifically, and the
culture of religious educational institutions in general.

Let me just start by saying that the Baylor alums I know are very good people and would make out well in the Pac 10. I can see how some might get the "in your face Baptist" vibe; but I got that during my time at UO as well. Now from an education standpoint, there is a valid point to be made regarding research/science. There is a fundamental difference in mindset and in the approach to instruction and course intent. How can there not be? That being said, a religious background does not disqualify an institution from being academically elite. Can they not teach calculus, economics, history, political science, anatomy, biology, chemistry, business, agriculture, etc...right up there with the best of them? (They Do).

I understand a desire to want to keep the conference a secular entity. I think that culturally, there is a very valid point to be had. I just don't believe that religion as it relates to academic quality, is a viable reason to object to Baylor's inclusion in the conference.

It amazes me how out right angry some people get when confronted by someone with an opposing view point than theirs, heaven forbid that they're confronted with such a thing

and like you said, I definitely don't think it should be a deciding factor on whether that institution can compete against yours in sports...... were view points and ideologies are set aside.

[greenyellow]

Wow, thanks Mukden, for coming on here and totally ruining this thread. I love it when supposed "open minded" people show how intolerant they really are to other beliefs. Now if C4Q can manage to find a few more just like you we can change the name to educk, and have no real sports talk just have every thread ruined by stupid politics and religion. I pretty sure 99% of us come to talk sports, and we would rather leave all religion and politics out of it. I think I speak for the majority here when I say STFU and if you don't have anything to add to the topic at hand don't post.

I think the subject is entirely relevant to the discussion. It may have gotten sidetracked a little, but the debate here is over the inclusion of a inherently religious institution to the Pac 10; and personally I think these are viable questions to ask.
Now I have a unique perspective on this, having spent my childhood/early adolesence in the Texas Hill Country and personally knowing many Baylor alums. I also come from a family that primarily
attended one of the "elite" religious institutions in the country; so I've
got some idea about how the people are at Baylor specifically, and the
culture of religious educational institutions in general.

Let me just start by saying that the Baylor alums I know are very good people and would make out well in the Pac 10. I can see how some might get the "in your face Baptist" vibe; but I got that during my time at UO as well. Now from an education standpoint, there is a valid point to be made regarding research/science. There is a fundamental difference in mindset and in the approach to instruction and course intent. How can there not be? That being said, a religious background does not disqualify an institution from being academically elite. Can they not teach calculus, economics, history, political science, anatomy, biology, chemistry, business, agriculture, etc...right up there with the best of them? (They Do).

I understand a desire to want to keep the conference a secular entity. I think that culturally, there is a very valid point to be had. I just don't believe that religion as it relates to academic quality, is a viable reason to object to Baylor's inclusion in the conference.

It amazes me how out right angry some people get when confronted by someone with an opposing view point than theirs, heaven forbid that they're confronted with such a thing

and like you said, I definitely don't think it should be a deciding factor on whether that institution can compete against yours in sports...... were view points and ideologies are set aside.

Putting aside religion, I don't think Baylor would bring much to the table athletically, except for a couple sports. I would actually rather have Utah if we couldn't get Texas A&M or Colorado.

[woundedknees]

If we choose to exclude institutions from consideration for ideological differences, be they political, religious, racial demographics, or whatever, that makes us guilty of some form of bigotry, does it not?

Does the fact that I, personally am a white, male, Christian in my 50's make my views less palatable to you? If so, too bad. I am a college sports fan who happens to be those things in addition to loving the Ducks.

Let's find some legitimate athletic reason for this discussion. If you guys want to talk politics, religion, etc., there is a forum here for that.

[greenyellow]

If we choose to exclude institutions from consideration for ideological differences, be they political, religious, racial demographics, or whatever, that makes us guilty of some form of bigotry, does it not?

Does the fact that I, personally am a white, male, Christian in my 50's make my views less palatable to you? If so, too bad. I am a college sports fan who happens to be those things in addition to loving the Ducks.

Let's find some legitimate athletic reason for this discussion. If you guys want to talk politics, religion, etc., there is a forum here for that.

It could be construed as bigotry but the conference is a somewhat private entity so they can do what they want to a certain degree. As far as athletics go, Colorado adds more overall value than Baylor, in both athletics and TV market-wise. Colorado opens up markets in that part of the country while Baylor really wouldn't add any TV market value since Texas would conceivably by opened up by the inclusion of Texas, Texas Tech, and Texas A&M.

[woundedknees]

Most of us would agree, the main reason for this proposed expansion is money, followed by athletic competition, with academics a distant 3rd... Given that, the addition of Colorado, rather than Baylor, is a viable idea.

If the addition of Baylor (Or lack thereof) is a deal breaker for the Texas schools, does it make sense, from a financial standpoint, to say no?

[greenyellow]

Most of us would agree, the main reason for this proposed expansion is money, followed by athletic competition, with academics a distant 3rd... Given that, the addition of Colorado, rather than Baylor, is a viable idea.

If the addition of Baylor (Or lack thereof) is a deal breaker for the Texas schools, does it make sense, from a financial standpoint, to say no?

This deal is all about money so you make the deal that gives the schools and conference the most money. Larry Scott will look at all the options and may have to persuade some schools that expansion is in their best interests, even if they disagree on a school's academic or religious backgrounds. I really have no problem with Baylor being included.

[Boom]

I don't think Baylor is the Pac10's first choice either....... Baylor would be included only if Texas forces us.....

That being said I don't think they would be a terrible addition.

They bring a top notch baseball & basketball program that would rival any Pac 10 school.....

Their FB program isn't great, but at least it's better than WSU........ btw Baylor went 2-2 against Colorado this past decade.....how sad is that......

[greenyellow]

I don't think Baylor is the Pac10's first choice either....... Baylor would be included only if Texas forces us.....

That being said I don't think they would be a terrible addition.

They bring a top notch baseball & basketball program that would rival any Pac 10 school.....

Their FB program isn't great, but at least it's better than WSU........ btw Baylor went 2-2 against Colorado this past decade.....how sad is that......

They don't have a bad track and field program either. They've produced some really good sprinters and hurdlers over the years.

[oregontrack]

Mukden - It appears that your making a lot of assumptions about "religious" schools and what they teach. Do you know for a fact that they claim the earth is only 6,000 yrs old? I doubt it..... whats next are you going to tell me they think evolution is fake?

Um, yes. According to Christian doctrine, the Earth is 6,000 years old. Laughable, I know, but I do believe Mormons follow the same Creationist beliefs as the other Christian religions.

[greenyellow]

Why is everyone getting sidetracked by a school's religious affiliations? They really don't mean a whole lot when it comes to the athletics and conference money aspects of the possible expansion plans. Religious bigotry is coming out in some posts and is really making the discussion seem like some are talking to brick walls who don't want any type of religious schools near the Pac-10. Even though I don't believe in any one religion, I still respect those that want to practice it and don't hold anything against them for doing it.