Hengst wrote:

BYUtx wrote:

A group of schools that generally find no reason for believing in God is not likely to admit a religious school. I remember Dick Harmon last year on KFAN (or maybe 1280) saying that he has been told as much by several decision-makers and VIP's.

I think there are two more likely options.
1-the BCS is completely overhauled
2-the MWC becomes a BCS conference
(Of course, if the NCAA/BCS somehow forced the PAC-10 to pick up 2 more schools, I think they'd forgive our religious foundations really quickly in the name of those $chools' real God.)

That's a stupid argument too. If ND was located in Washington in stead of south bend the Pac 10 would be drooling over them (sort of like the big 10 does now). This is a sports thing, not a religious prejudicial thing.

But ND is a sports school, not a religious school.

Hengst wrote:

bengel:

I recall hearing that BYU doesn't meet standards for admission to the PAC 10 because we are not a research institution, or something like that. Perhaps someone more attuned to the nuances of academia can shed some light on this.

I sort of doubt the validity of that statement. I'd be willing to bet good money that we publish a lot more than oregon state.

And don't bring up the med school argument either. Half the schools in the pac 10 do not have med schools.

This has nothing to do with academics. It's purely a sports decision. Anyone who tells you differently doesn't know what they're talking about. The pac-10 is happy being a 10 team league. They're happy with their rivalries and their tradition and there is no room for BYU or Boise State or any other school on the outside looking in. That's just the sad reality of it.

Actually it is true. BYU although it has done quite a bit of research is not considered a research university meanwhile OSU and all other PAC-10 schools are considered reasearch universiities or medical schools.

And the argument isn't that you must be a research university and a medical school it is one or the other. You must be either a research university or a medical school to meet the PAC-10 academic standards.

And though I agree with you to a certian extent that it is about sports and its dollars the PAC-10 has generated a letter that clearly stated that BYU was neither of the above mentioned type of university and therefore didn't meet their standards. I believe it to be more of an excuse then a real reason but that is what their commish has stated. and yes the most important thing to note is that the PAC-10 sees no benifit in adding anyone to their conference short of being forced to do so.

On another note if they were to ever expand the ONLY two posiiblities would be either BYU and Utah or Colordao and CSU. The PAC-10 love to take rivalries into their fold when they make their moves. If they went they would take two teams with history and standing and the ONLY two teams that fit that bill are the above mentioned teams.

Do a search on old threads. We have been through this. All the points were given in those.
BYU will never get an invitation from the PAC-10. We are not a "Research School" whereas Utah is and could then be invited. Don't be surprised that if they wanted to invite someone it would be Utah and maybe BSU. We have a much better chance of being invited to the Big 12 provided they kick someone out (Colorado, IA ST, or maybe Baylor). But forget about the puk-10. But who wants to be associated with a bunch of die-hard liberal schools anyways.

Here is an exchange between a BYU fan and Tom Hansen, Commish of the Pac-10:


Disclaimer: Before you read this, please understand that I made it clear to him that this is not an official comment from the PAC-10, but is just his perspective on the situation. In other words, it would be unfair if his kind response were used as some kind of leverage against him.

This is my letter:

Dear Mr. Hansen,

I am a law student at the University of Michigan. I am very interested in a body of law called Higher-education Law. I am writing because I seek to understanding the role of academic freedom in athletic conference composition. I am also a BYU graduate who has often wondered why the Pac-10 has seemed disinterested in the money and potential represented by BYU's sports programs.

Some un-authenticated sources suggest that one major reason that BYU is not invited to the Pac-10 is because of BYU's stand on academic freedom (which some argue amounts to academic restraint). (I also understand that playing on Sunday is an issue, but I am not concerned with that.)

I do not seek an official statement, but I would like to know:

Is BYU's approach to academics a factor that prevents them from more serious consideration by the Pac-10?

Is there a meaningful way to petition the Pac-10 decision-makers, or otherwise influence them to consider BYU as an asset rather than a liability? (Even with regard to the academic freedom issue, for example.) I am sure that flooding your inbox would be counterproductive.

I know that you have many responsibilities which keep you very busy.
Thank you for your time.



Here is his response:

Mr. -----,

I am pleased to respond to your inquiry, though I am going to provide brief answers where each element merits lengthy explanation and definition. Time requires brevity.

While the Pac-10 has not talked about expansion except in the broadest sense (see point No. 1 below) since the mid 1990's, I have never heard a discussion of academic freedom related to BYU during any discussion of possible expansion of the Conference.

Here are factors which have been prominent in relation to expansion of the Pac-10 and to BYU as a possible candidate.

1. The Chief Executive Officers of the member institutions about 1997 determined that they were pleased with the current membership of the Conference and would no longer consider or discuss the subject of expansion, thus ending discussion which had begun in 1990 when Penn State moved into the Big Ten.

2. Our Athletics Directors do not want to add members because they do not want to be forced to divide into two divisions. Further, there is no interest in a football playoff. They have judged that such a game would be likely to hurt the Conference's chances to advance teams to the BCS National Championship Game and other bowls.

3. The primary reason a I-A conference expands is to enlarge its home area for the sale of television rights in football. The Pac-10 claims about 19 per cent of the nation in its home area. Thus any new member would have to bring more than 1.9 per cent of the nation's television households to enlarge the home area enough to provide sufficient
additional income to increase the rights paid each member of the Conference. While I have not checked the numbers for some time, when we checked out every Western Division I-A university in the mid 1990's Utah had about .7 per cent of the nation's TV households. In comparison, we were interested in Texas because that State has
approximately 7 per cent of the nation's households.

4. The single most important factor to the Pac-10 were it ever to expand would be the academic nature and standing of any institution under consideration. Many sports fans probably would find that difficult to understand, but our CEOs made that clear. The Pac-10 members are all major research institutions, and any institution being
considered would have to be in that category. BYU is a fine academic institution, but it is primarily dedicated to undergraduate education rather than research, according to those who know about such things. That would be a major impediment for it.

I hope these comments are helpful. Thank you for writing.

Tom Hansen

Hengst wrote:

bengel:

I recall hearing that BYU doesn't meet standards for admission to the PAC 10 because we are not a research institution, or something like that. Perhaps someone more attuned to the nuances of academia can shed some light on this.

I sort of doubt the validity of that statement. I'd be willing to bet good money that we publish a lot more than oregon state.

And don't bring up the med school argument either. Half the schools in the pac 10 do not have med schools.

This has nothing to do with academics. It's purely a sports decision. Anyone who tells you differently doesn't know what they're talking about. The pac-10 is happy being a 10 team league. They're happy with their rivalries and their tradition and there is no room for BYU or Boise State or any other school on the outside looking in. That's just the sad reality of it.

What's your reason for betting against Oregon State? They are a top research organization with over 80 graduate programs and tops in a number of fields related to the sciences and engineering.

mormonrasta wrote:

Here is an exchange between a BYU fan and Tom Hansen, Commish of the Pac-10:


Disclaimer: Before you read this, please understand that I made it clear to him that this is not an official comment from the PAC-10, but is just his perspective on the situation. In other words, it would be unfair if his kind response were used as some kind of leverage against him.

This is my letter:

Dear Mr. Hansen,

I am a law student at the University of Michigan. I am very interested in a body of law called Higher-education Law. I am writing because I seek to understanding the role of academic freedom in athletic conference composition. I am also a BYU graduate who has often wondered why the Pac-10 has seemed disinterested in the money and potential represented by BYU's sports programs.

Some un-authenticated sources suggest that one major reason that BYU is not invited to the Pac-10 is because of BYU's stand on academic freedom (which some argue amounts to academic restraint). (I also understand that playing on Sunday is an issue, but I am not concerned with that.)

I do not seek an official statement, but I would like to know:

Is BYU's approach to academics a factor that prevents them from more serious consideration by the Pac-10?

Is there a meaningful way to petition the Pac-10 decision-makers, or otherwise influence them to consider BYU as an asset rather than a liability? (Even with regard to the academic freedom issue, for example.) I am sure that flooding your inbox would be counterproductive.

I know that you have many responsibilities which keep you very busy.
Thank you for your time.



Here is his response:

Mr. -----,

I am pleased to respond to your inquiry, though I am going to provide brief answers where each element merits lengthy explanation and definition. Time requires brevity.

While the Pac-10 has not talked about expansion except in the broadest sense (see point No. 1 below) since the mid 1990's, I have never heard a discussion of academic freedom related to BYU during any discussion of possible expansion of the Conference.

Here are factors which have been prominent in relation to expansion of the Pac-10 and to BYU as a possible candidate.

1. The Chief Executive Officers of the member institutions about 1997 determined that they were pleased with the current membership of the Conference and would no longer consider or discuss the subject of expansion, thus ending discussion which had begun in 1990 when Penn State moved into the Big Ten.

2. Our Athletics Directors do not want to add members because they do not want to be forced to divide into two divisions. Further, there is no interest in a football playoff. They have judged that such a game would be likely to hurt the Conference's chances to advance teams to the BCS National Championship Game and other bowls.

3. The primary reason a I-A conference expands is to enlarge its home area for the sale of television rights in football. The Pac-10 claims about 19 per cent of the nation in its home area. Thus any new member would have to bring more than 1.9 per cent of the nation's television households to enlarge the home area enough to provide sufficient
additional income to increase the rights paid each member of the Conference. While I have not checked the numbers for some time, when we checked out every Western Division I-A university in the mid 1990's Utah had about .7 per cent of the nation's TV households. In comparison, we were interested in Texas because that State has
approximately 7 per cent of the nation's households.

4. The single most important factor to the Pac-10 were it ever to expand would be the academic nature and standing of any institution under consideration. Many sports fans probably would find that difficult to understand, but our CEOs made that clear. The Pac-10 members are all major research institutions, and any institution being
considered would have to be in that category. BYU is a fine academic institution, but it is primarily dedicated to undergraduate education rather than research, according to those who know about such things. That would be a major impediment for it.

I hope these comments are helpful. Thank you for writing.

Tom Hansen

This is an amazing letter. Kind of makes it clear what the position is and where the opportunities lie.

In my mind, the best thing for BYU is to figure out how to make the MWC strong and get it (ie the league) into the BSC...

Interestingly, I grew up in Oregon in the 1970s. The Ducks and Beavers were completely different animals back then. They had no respect. They rarely had winning seasons. My FIL was an OSU prof and spent a ton of money on season tickets every year to see a team lose over and over and over (but he did get to see some class act competitors ).

We need to get our MWC institutions to the point where there is respect across the league. This comes with wins. Wins come with dollars and branding. It's not just a BYU thing. It's a league thing.