[College Football] Big Ten, Texas have initial talks

Where you hear that?

 

But they haven't helped and are trying hard to help us now. I wonder why.

 

Thank you for that.

And that quote came from gucci888, a UT alumni, and one of the more savvy college sports fans on this board.

It's a point worth driving home.

 

Since the Big 12 is already formed, they can't just "kick out" Baylor and place UH in. They have no reason to *want* Baylor out of the Big 12. Having Baylor in the Big 12 helps the State. It does not help the State as much as UH in the Big 12 would, but like I said, the precedent has been established, so there's not much that can be done.

 

They are though. People don't see texas academics before the football or any other sports. When regualr students go to school, they want that athletic power also. They want to see UT beat the crap out of TAMU in every sense of the word. Lets be frank, a degree in bio from UT is no different than one from TT. When you're applying for med school, they're not going to weigh a 3.5 from UT more in favor than one from TT.

 

You sure about that? TT nearly lost accreditation not too long ago. TT is pretty low on the totem poll academically.

 

So are u saying that they look at a degree from TT like a 2 yr juco associates? :grin:

 

I'm pretty sure Tech is ranked below UH academically, Leeb, and certainly below UT. Look it up.

 

While very few would question UT's academic superiority to TTU, it is true that most graduate school admissions boards rarely give much consideration to the undergraduate institution the applicant attended unless it's an Ivy or an online diploma mill. More often they look at the major, rather than the institution. At least I'm 100% sure this is how it works in law school, med school may be different, but I haven't heard such. Now, if you go into a bar and start a pissing contest with somebody about whose degree is worth more, then yeah.

 

In some areas yes, in some areas no. Not by USNWR standards, but those are fairly superfluous. Where Tech and UH are really fighting each other is in the research arms race, where UH holds a moderate lead. Tier 1 is not far off for both institutions there, though.

 

Thats what I'm saying in the real world. If you have a degree from the ivy league or rice, yeah its held above a degree from say lsu, but a ee from u of h is no different than one from ut.

 

Is it thought? LOL. I guess its a philosophical debate. UT and Texas A&M along with Michigan have the best job placement success of any public schools. So, is the degree different? I think so. Apparently grad schools don't take it into account, I would think they would though.

 

Maybe the perks from this is the large alumni or maybe they do a better job of prepping for post college. I know my nephew graduated from Morehouse and he had people beating down the door for him for grad school. I think the cream always rises to the top no matter where you're at. They look to find exceptional talent all the time.

 

I can't speak for bio, but certainly for things like business or engineering, there is absolutely a world of difference depending on where you go. I can guarantee you having Michigan or Cal or Texas will give you a substantial leg up over LSU or Alabama or Ole Miss.

 

Maybe so, i don't have any facts to back any of it up other than the small smaple size i have. My nephew graduated from morehouse and his best friend from UT and both were engineering. He had his pick of the litter because he was exceptional. He best friend was supposedly really good, but exceptional is another level. You could be right, I'm not disputing that, I'm just saying we're not talking Ivy league here

 

There are always exceptions to the rule.

A bio major from UT or any other tier 1/2 school with the same GPA/MCAT score will get preference for a med school interview over a TT graduate.

 

Guess I used "bigger" figuratively rather than actually meaning the number of students. I definitely should have used "richer," but does it really make a difference? Money is the driving factor in all of this IMO so I believe Baylor's financial resources makes them a player (maybe even more so than UH), as does their status as a tier one school.

As far as Major's post, I definitely agree that affiliating with the right conference affects how your school is seen in the public. Hopefully my posts don't reflect that point of view because Baylor's resources and tier 1 status impact my view more so than their affiliation with the Big 12.

Also, please don't take my posts as a personal attack on UH. I've posted multiple times that I like UH and root for them every chance I get. But in my personal opinion, trying to keep Baylor in a conference has priority over trying to add UH or TCU to a major conference at this point.

 

hmm... now why would they want to do that? i wonder.....

 

OK. Maybe i guess morehouse is linked to g tech and they have one of the best engineering programs, even ahead of texas.

 

Not trying to pick on you, but what does them being richer have to do with anything? Is the State of Texas concerned with protecting the richest schools, rather than the schools that serve the largest number of its citizens and has the largest economic impact on the State? If we're arguing that rich = important/big, then well, the Baylor argument doesn't hold up, because TCU, SMU, and Rice all have larger endowments and smaller enrollments, meaning the $$$ per student is even larger.

I really don't get what you were trying to convey, even with your clarification post. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense either way.

Money is a driving factor in all this, yes. But not money that the schools have, or money that they charge their students, its about money that can be made by the schools for conference affiliation (TV money, BCS money, etc). In that sense, Baylor doesn't have much pull. Neither does hardly anybody else outside of UT/A&M. I can't find anything on Baylor's academic standing (USNWR is all I see, which illicits eyerolls from most), which I know is not Tier 1 (research). Essentially what makes Baylor a "player" in this is the fact that they're currently in the Big 12. That's about it. If they weren't, no one would be going to bat for them. Not to rehash history, but it wasn't Baylor's academics, athletics, or revenue that got them into the Big 12, it was being ridiculously politically connected at the time. Baylor owes Bob Bullock (and a host of other capitol players) a buttload of bombastic blowjobs for getting them into the Big 12 over TCU and SMU. But hey, I'm not hating the player, I'm hating the game. More power to them, I would've done the same thing in their position. But now the tables are turned and Baylor has very few friends in high places and is essentially a liability for the Big 12 South. The best Baylor can hope for is the Big 12 remaining together, because there is no way in high holy hell that they are going to the SEC with A&M or the Pac 10 with UT. And I'm not saying that out of spite, I'm saying that as a business man.