Interesting comments from former KSU president

[Mountain Man Hawk]

Lots of interesting comments in here regarding the Big12/8. Here are a few:

Also, the Big 12 evolution. Wefald was Chairman of the Association of Big Eight schools in 1990, when the college sports landscape started trembling. Over the next couple of years, the Big Ten, Southeastern and Atlantic Coast conferences expanded. The Southwest Conference was wobbling and the Big Eight needed to change or would be left behind.​

Initially, Wefald talked about a merger of the 16 schools. But on a conference call in February 1994, Wefald recalled then-Texas president Bob Berdahl shaping the league. “’Here is what we decided,’” Wefald quoted Berdahl. “’We encourage the Big 8 Conference to invite Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Baylor and Texas to form a new conference.’”​

Wefald: “For four years, I had hoped we could convince Texas to join the Big 8. I did not want to ask Bob Berdahl any questions about the fate of Rice, Houston, SMU and TCU. I knew there was only one difference between K-State and them: we were in the Big 8.”​

On picking the first Big 12 commissioner, a choice between Southwest Conference commissioner Steve Hatchell and Kansas athletic director Bob Frederick: “I liked them both. I had known Bob for years. He was an outstanding AD and a classy person … But I was shocked to find out that Charles Kiesler, the Missouri Chancellor, would not vote for any KU candidate. If Kiesler had set aside his pettiness, Bob Frederick would have been the new Big 12 Commissioner.”​

On the academic rule that limited the number of Proposition 48 qualifiers — the SWC didn’t allow them, the Big Eight did and new league settled on one such qualifier for football and men’s basketball: “It was aimed directly at (Nebraska) Cornhusker football. By the late 1990s, this new Big 12 rule has seriously damaged the quality of Nebraska football. In fact, you could say it brought the era of Bob Devaney and Tom Osborne to a close.”​

Wefald recalled Berdahl harmed Nebraska after leaving Texas. Berdahl was the president of the Association of American Universities (AAU) in 2011 when Nebraska was voted out of the prestigious group. Wefald said Berdahl could have used his influence to sway a close vote.​

“The truth is,” Wefald wrote, “no outside academic leader has dented Nebraska’s athletic and academic standing over the years more than Bob Berdahl.​

“In another irony, if Nebraska had not been a member of the AAU in 2010 when the Big 10 was adding a new school, the University of Missouri, an AAU school, would likely be a member of the Big 10 today.”​

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/campus-corner/article79794447.html#storylink=cpy


http://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/campus-corner/article79794447.html

 

[Lone Clone]

I was told by a pretty good source that Texas didn't want KSU or ISU in the new league, but the other six Big Eight members insisted that the only way they'd go along was if it was a matter of the Big Eight adding four schools.

 

[WORTHYWISH]

Gotta feeling Clownie's luck is going to run out.

 

[DogBoyRy]

Lots of interesting comments in here regarding the Big12/8. Here are a few:

Also, the Big 12 evolution. Wefald was Chairman of the Association of Big Eight schools in 1990, when the college sports landscape started trembling. Over the next couple of years, the Big Ten, Southeastern and Atlantic Coast conferences expanded. The Southwest Conference was wobbling and the Big Eight needed to change or would be left behind.​

Initially, Wefald talked about a merger of the 16 schools. But on a conference call in February 1994, Wefald recalled then-Texas president Bob Berdahl shaping the league. “’Here is what we decided,’” Wefald quoted Berdahl. “’We encourage the Big 8 Conference to invite Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Baylor and Texas to form a new conference.’”​

Wefald: “For four years, I had hoped we could convince Texas to join the Big 8. I did not want to ask Bob Berdahl any questions about the fate of Rice, Houston, SMU and TCU. I knew there was only one difference between K-State and them: we were in the Big 8.”​

On picking the first Big 12 commissioner, a choice between Southwest Conference commissioner Steve Hatchell and Kansas athletic director Bob Frederick: “I liked them both. I had known Bob for years. He was an outstanding AD and a classy person … But I was shocked to find out that Charles Kiesler, the Missouri Chancellor, would not vote for any KU candidate. If Kiesler had set aside his pettiness, Bob Frederick would have been the new Big 12 Commissioner.”​

On the academic rule that limited the number of Proposition 48 qualifiers — the SWC didn’t allow them, the Big Eight did and new league settled on one such qualifier for football and men’s basketball: “It was aimed directly at (Nebraska) Cornhusker football. By the late 1990s, this new Big 12 rule has seriously damaged the quality of Nebraska football. In fact, you could say it brought the era of Bob Devaney and Tom Osborne to a close.”​

Wefald recalled Berdahl harmed Nebraska after leaving Texas. Berdahl was the president of the Association of American Universities (AAU) in 2011 when Nebraska was voted out of the prestigious group. Wefald said Berdahl could have used his influence to sway a close vote.​

“The truth is,” Wefald wrote, “no outside academic leader has dented Nebraska’s athletic and academic standing over the years more than Bob Berdahl.​

“In another irony, if Nebraska had not been a member of the AAU in 2010 when the Big 10 was adding a new school, the University of Missouri, an AAU school, would likely be a member of the Big 10 today.”​

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/campus-corner/article79794447.html#storylink=cpy


http://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/campus-corner/article79794447.html

Love the Nebby comments.
Anybody think they'll ever win a Big 10 championship or get as even close as we did last year?

 

[ottumwan in tx]

I was told by a pretty good source that Texas didn't want KSU or ISU in the new league, but the other six Big Eight members insisted that the only way they'd go along was if it was a matter of the Big Eight adding four schools.

this is about right

 

[paednoch23]

I was told by a pretty good source that Texas didn't want KSU or ISU in the new league, but the other six Big Eight members insisted that the only way they'd go along was if it was a matter of the Big Eight adding four schools.

Yes I can see the other schools wanting some easy wins. Lucky you.

 

[CO_hawk]

What about the Big 8 plus Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Illinois? Wonder if that ever was discussed.

 

[Alum-Ni]

What about the Big 8 plus Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Illinois? Wonder if that ever was discussed.

Doubtful. TV markets were already driving conference realignment/expansion in the 90s.....those four would help the Big 8 in those terms with Chicago and Twin Cities, but still paled in comparison to the state of Texas. And those Texas schools were also desperate to get into a better league, just like the big 8 was looking to do

 

[Lone Clone]

What about the Big 8 plus Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Illinois? Wonder if that ever was discussed.

I doubt it very much. It was all about TV by then.

There was some talk around 1980 of Northwestern leaving the Big Ten, and coupled with the talk about that was talk about ISU replacing it. The talk got to the point that the Register asked Iowa if it would oppose the move (as Michigan did when Michigan State joined) and Iowa said it would not.

 

[dekhawk]

I doubt it very much. It was all about TV by then.

There was some talk around 1980 of Northwestern leaving the Big Ten, and coupled with the talk about that was talk about ISU replacing it. The talk got to the point that the Register asked Iowa if it would oppose the move (as Michigan did when Michigan State joined) and Iowa said it would not.

That sounds like a stretch. I remember the talk of Northwestern leaving, but I never heard of ISU replacing them. I think that's wishful thinking on your part and not fact.

 

[icu81222]

"the academic rule that limited the number of Proposition 48 qualifiers — the SWC didn’t allow them, the Big Eight did and new league settled on one such qualifier for football and men’s basketball: “It was aimed directly at (Nebraska) Cornhusker football. By the late 1990s, this new Big 12 rule has seriously damaged the quality of Nebraska football. In fact, you could say it brought the era of Bob Devaney and Tom Osborne to a close.”


Hmmmm

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

Love the Nebby comments.
Anybody think they'll ever win a Big 10 championship or get as even close as we did last year?

Yes, I still think Nebraska will win the Big 10 at some point, and I definitely believe they will get to the Big 10 Championship at some point as the Big 10 West is not that strong. I don't see Nebraska ever getting back to the level of prominence they had in the 90's, but they still are a solid program and consistently have solid recruiting classes. I don't see much separating Iowa, Wisconsin, and Nebraska. One of those three will be the favorites to win the Big 10 West for the foreseeable future.

 

[Lone Clone]

That sounds like a stretch. I remember the talk of Northwestern leaving, but I never heard of ISU replacing them. I think that's wishful thinking on your part and not fact.

No, not wishful thinking, but it was just talk, as I said. Not serious negotiations or anything remotely like that. Pretty much like all the talk that's going on now about reorganization. I wasted a lot of time in those days in the Gazette sports department (this was before the Internet); the sports editor at the time was against it, but certainly didn't think the discussion was unrealistic.

At the time, I'm thinking late '70s, ISU would have been a logical option to replace Northwestern. Trice and Hilton were relatively new, the teams were experiencing decent success in numerous sports, the academics, geography and size were all in the correct ballpark. State school, not private. Already in a major conference. The only possibility I remember being mentioned that was clearly better was Notre Dame, and that's been the Big Ten's wet dream for about a century. I don't recall anybody mentioning Penn State. I do remember Nebraska and Missouri.

All the talk was predicated on the possibility of NW leaving, though; I don't recall anybody talking about expansion for the sake of expansion.

 

[soybean]

No, not wishful thinking, but it was just talk, as I said. Not serious negotiations or anything remotely like that. Pretty much like all the talk that's going on now about reorganization. I wasted a lot of time in those days in the Gazette sports department (this was before the Internet); the sports editor at the time was against it, but certainly didn't think the discussion was unrealistic.

At the time, I'm thinking late '70s, ISU would have been a logical option to replace Northwestern. Trice and Hilton were relatively new, the teams were experiencing decent success in numerous sports, the academics, geography and size were all in the correct ballpark. State school, not private. Already in a major conference. The only possibility I remember being mentioned that was clearly better was Notre Dame, and that's been the Big Ten's wet dream for about a century. I don't recall anybody mentioning Penn State. I do remember Nebraska and Missouri.

All the talk was predicated on the possibility of NW leaving, though; I don't recall anybody talking about expansion for the sake of expansion.

That is how I remember it too, LC. These guys that insist that ISU in the BIG10 could/would never happen don't have a clue what they are talking about.

I have to add this - if it came down to a choice between Missouri & Nebraska to join the BIG10 I would have vote for Missouri everytime. But it also makes sense that if you could create a perfect 16 team league for the BIG10 to morph into now both Iowa State & Notre Dame would make the most sense just about any way you measure it.

 

[5Fan5]

That is how I remember it too, LC. These guys that insist that ISU in the BIG10 could/would never happen don't have a clue what they are talking about.

I have to add this - if it came down to a choice between Missouri & Nebraska to join the BIG10 I would have vote for Missouri everytime. But it also makes sense that if you could create a perfect 16 team league for the BIG10 to morph into now both Iowa State & Notre Dame would make the most sense just about any way you measure it.

Bean, I appreciate most of what you post but you are off in the far, far reaches on this one. Now, if either you or LC come up with any substantive fact to support your comments, then I might be convinced more than I am now.

As it stands today. there is zero chance that the institution from Ames will ever become a part of the Big Ten or likely any of the other Power 5 Conferences. Their sole hope is for the big xii to survive in some fashion (expansion, absorption - who knows with what Baylor has created). Otherwise, it is off to another non-Power 5 league forevermore.

 

[DogBoyRy]

That is how I remember it too, LC. These guys that insist that ISU in the BIG10 could/would never happen don't have a clue what they are talking about.

I have to add this - if it came down to a choice between Missouri & Nebraska to join the BIG10 I would have vote for Missouri everytime. But it also makes sense that if you could create a perfect 16 team league for the BIG10 to morph into now both Iowa State & Notre Dame would make the most sense just about any way you measure it.

Shouldn't you be headed for the basement?
Think I saw a cloud.

 

[Lone Clone]

That is how I remember it too, LC. These guys that insist that ISU in the BIG10 could/would never happen don't have a clue what they are talking about.

I have to add this - if it came down to a choice between Missouri & Nebraska to join the BIG10 I would have vote for Missouri everytime. But it also makes sense that if you could create a perfect 16 team league for the BIG10 to morph into now both Iowa State & Notre Dame would make the most sense just about any way you measure it.

I was talking about a little less than 40 years ago. I cannot imagine ISU to the BiG in today's college athletics landscape, unless there were some kind of massive nationwide reorganization.

 

[And1Hawk]

I was talking about a little less than 40 years ago. I cannot imagine ISU to the BiG in today's college athletics landscape, unless there were some kind of massive nationwide reorganization.

As I wrote in another thread I am actually open to a national reorganization (8 regions of 8 teams based on geography). It makes sense, would be fun and it would funnel everything into a nice playoff that is decided by on the field games. Probably never happen but it could work very well.

 

[grosie#2]

I was talking about a little less than 40 years ago. I cannot imagine ISU to the BiG in today's college athletics landscape, unless there were some kind of massive nationwide reorganization.

If the Big 12 folds there will probably be a mad scramble within the Big 12 for teams to find another conference. Which will result in a nationwide reorganization. With the Baylor debacle, it may give the Big 12 incentive to expand fearing that Baylor may become the Baylor of old. A couple of days ago it probably was better than a 50% chance of the Big 12 folding. Thank- you Baylor for maybe saving the Big 12 and stopping a massive nationwide reorganization.

 

[Lone Clone]

If the Big 12 folds there will probably be a mad scramble within the Big 12 for teams to find another conference. Which will result in a nationwide reorganization. With the Baylor debacle, it may give the Big 12 incentive to expand fearing that Baylor may become the Baylor of old. A couple of days ago it probably was better than a 50% chance of the Big 12 folding. Thank- you Baylor for maybe saving the Big 12 and stopping a massive nationwide reorganization.

I don't understand your logic vis-a-vis Baylor, so naturally I disagree

On the other point, a lot would depend on the nature of the fold, if the conference folds. There's a lot of talk about Texas and/or Oklahoma departing for greener pastures, but the people doing the talking have a tough time explaining where those pastures might be. Moreover, the GOR is a huge hurdle. For those two reasons, alone, I think it's unlikely we see any of the current members pulling up stakes in the next few years. And if they did, for reasons I cannot fathom now, I don't see why it would spur a nationwide reorganization. What's more likely is that the remaining 8 schools would try to get the best new talent they could.....which brings us back to Louisville, Memphis, Cincinnati, the two regional Florida schools, Houston, Colorado State, etc., etc., etc.

I think what's more likely to happen this summer -- if anything -- is either a simple expansion or some kind of half-assed merger. The latter was discussed with the Big East back before Missouri and A&M left.

 

[iclone]

Bean, I appreciate most of what you post but you are off in the far, far reaches on this one. Now, if either you or LC come up with any substantive fact to support your comments, then I might be convinced more than I am now.

As it stands today. there is zero chance that the institution from Ames will ever become a part of the Big Ten or likely any of the other Power 5 Conferences. Their sole hope is for the big xii to survive in some fashion (expansion, absorption - who knows with what Baylor has created). Otherwise, it is off to another non-Power 5 league forevermore.

The BOR will not approve of ISU not being in a P5 unless they tap into the TV money that Iowa receives. Along those lines, a former Regents member writes about what is happening with UNI in the linked column...

http://www.dmcityview.com/civic-ski...-the-system-is-rigged-against-the-university/

 

[paednoch23]

The BOR will not approve of ISU not being in a P5 unless they tap into the TV money that Iowa receives. Along those lines, a former Regents member writes about what is happening with UNI in the linked column...

http://www.dmcityview.com/civic-ski...-the-system-is-rigged-against-the-university/

Pretty sure you haven't a clue what the BOR thinks. Wondering if your foolish comment about revenue tapping isn't a violation of the member contracts within the BIG let alone a violation of Article 9 section 2 of the Constitution of the State of Iowa. Which the BOR have no control over.

 

[Slappy Pappy]

BOR and ISU have no control over what conference they are *invited* to join if the one they are in dissolves.

 

[Lone Clone]

BOR and ISU have no control over what conference they are *invited* to join if the one they are in dissolves.

This is true. The BOR has the authority to approve or disapprove acceptance of an invitation; for that matter, hypothetically the BOR could tell Iowa to withdraw from the BiG. But it can't force ISU to join an organization that doesn't want ISU.

The BOR tells Iowa and ISU they have to be self-supporting, which means that if they aren't in a P5 league, they would have to make massive spending reductions.

 

[Slappy Pappy]

That is how I remember it too, LC. These guys that insist that ISU in the BIG10 could/would never happen don't have a clue what they are talking about.

I have to add this - if it came down to a choice between Missouri & Nebraska to join the BIG10 I would have vote for Missouri everytime. But it also makes sense that if you could create a perfect 16 team league for the BIG10 to morph into now both Iowa State & Notre Dame would make the most sense just about any way you measure it.

Besides ND, Pitt or Missouri would be far better choices. Missouri would jump to the B1G in about a second if offered.

 

[iclone]

BOR and ISU have no control over what conference they are *invited* to join if the one they are in dissolves.

Not even close to the point being made

 

[iclone]

Pretty sure you haven't a clue what the BOR thinks. Wondering if your foolish comment about revenue tapping isn't a violation of the member contracts within the BIG let alone a violation of Article 9 section 2 of the Constitution of the State of Iowa. Which the BOR have no control over.

Pretty sure you didn't read the link written by a former regents member

 

[Slappy Pappy]

Pretty sure you didn't read the link written by a former regents member

You do realize, don't you, that their is nothing in that ramble from a former BOR about taking Iowa's athletic department revenue to prop up the failing college in Cedar Falls? If you have an actual point, you should try to make it yourself, instead of linking articles that don't actually support it.

Also, the UI gets more money from the state because it operates the state hospital. They're being disingenuous when they lump all state funding the UI gets to average out how much per student compared to ISU or UNI. Hospital funding should be left out, as that has no real affect on the average student engineering or education student.

The correct move by the legislature would be to put together a plan to shutter UNI, and distribute that funding to Iowa and ISU who would absorb 90% of its students.

 

[Lone Clone]

Besides ND, Pitt or Missouri would be far better choices. Missouri would jump to the B1G in about a second if offered.

Again, I was talking about the situation 40 years ago. Yes to Missouri, No to Pitt. Geography was a major consideration back in the day.

 

[Tigerhawk22]

Pretty sure you didn't read the link written by a former regents member

You clowns will cling to anything.

 

[iclone]

You do realize, don't you, that their is nothing in that ramble from a former BOR about taking Iowa's athletic department revenue to prop up the failing college in Cedar Falls? If you have an actual point, you should try to make it yourself, instead of linking articles that don't actually support it.

Also, the UI gets more money from the state because it operates the state hospital. They're being disingenuous when they lump all state funding the UI gets to average out how much per student compared to ISU or UNI. Hospital funding should be left out, as that has no real affect on the average student engineering or education student.

The correct move by the legislature would be to put together a plan to shutter UNI, and distribute that funding to Iowa and ISU who would absorb 90% of its students.

Column (not an article) specifically mentions TV money.

 

[paednoch23]

Pretty sure you didn't read the link written by a former regents member

Pretty sure I did and I had already read another article very similar to it. I'm thinking that Michael Gartner didn't realize the Consititution of the state forbids what he suggested 6 years ago. Additionally ISU is a Morrill act institution. I assume uncle sam didn't provide funds for the establishment of a university (ISU) so the State could steal funds from it to give to another (state established) institution. You know your original comment regarding "theres no way the BOR would allow ISU to not be in a P5 conf without tapping money from Iowa" made me think of a neighbor kid when I grew up. He was constantly trying to impress the other kids in the neighborhood even though he just sorta sucked at everything. To be honest he was annoying as hell. I remember one day we picking teams to play sandlot baseball and had one extra person. After teams were picked he was the last one left out. In anger this little brat decided that if he wasn't going to play NOBODY was going to play so he ran off with the only two baseballs we had. I had forgotten about this event until now. Thanks for rousing memories for me.

 

[Lone Clone]

Pretty sure I did and I had already read another article very similar to it. I'm thinking that Michael Gartner didn't realize the Consititution of the state forbids what he suggested 6 years ago. Additionally ISU is a Morrill act institution. I assume uncle sam didn't provide funds for the establishment of a university (ISU) so the State could steal funds from it to give to another (state established) institution. You know your original comment regarding "theres no way the BOR would allow ISU to not be in a P5 conf without tapping money from Iowa" made me think of a neighbor kid when I grew up. He was constantly trying to impress the other kids in the neighborhood even though he just sorta sucked at everything. To be honest he was annoying as hell. I remember one day we picking teams to play sandlot baseball and had one extra person. After teams were picked he was the last one left out. In anger this little brat decided that if he wasn't going to play NOBODY was going to play so he ran off with the only two baseballs we had. I had forgotten about this event until now. Thanks for rousing memories for me.

I don't know how familiar you are with Michael Gartner, but this wouldn't be at all surprising.

 

[iclone]

Pretty sure I did and I had already read another article very similar to it. I'm thinking that Michael Gartner didn't realize the Consititution of the state forbids what he suggested 6 years ago. Additionally ISU is a Morrill act institution. I assume uncle sam didn't provide funds for the establishment of a university (ISU) so the State could steal funds from it to give to another (state established) institution. You know your original comment regarding "theres no way the BOR would allow ISU to not be in a P5 conf without tapping money from Iowa" made me think of a neighbor kid when I grew up. He was constantly trying to impress the other kids in the neighborhood even though he just sorta sucked at everything. To be honest he was annoying as hell. I remember one day we picking teams to play sandlot baseball and had one extra person. After teams were picked he was the last one left out. In anger this little brat decided that if he wasn't going to play NOBODY was going to play so he ran off with the only two baseballs we had. I had forgotten about this event until now. Thanks for rousing memories for me.

Are we in agreement that this is Iowa's constitution?

http://publications.iowa.gov/135/1/history/7-7.html

 

[paednoch23]

Are we in agreement that this is Iowa's constitution?

http://publications.iowa.gov/135/1/history/7-7.html

No we are not in agreement. I have the print copy in my hand. You can obtain a copy if you request in writing. Mine is in hand because spouse is an attorney. Furthermore you need to get a copy of the BIG contract in hand (you can do so in writing) to demonstrate how it is OK to violate the BIG's contractual agreements regarding sharing BIG binding revenue with non BIG members. You will not be happy. The BIG doesn't care about ISU and in fact likely want them to go away to strengthen the status of one of their memebers (iowa).

 

[iclone]

No we are not in agreement. I have the print copy in my hand. You can obtain a copy if you request in writing. Mine is in hand because spouse is an attorney. Furthermore you need to get a copy of the BIG contract in hand (you can do so in writing) to demonstrate how it is OK to violate the BIG's contractual agreements regarding sharing BIG binding revenue with non BIG members. You will not be happy. The BIG doesn't care about ISU and in fact likely want them to go away to strengthen the status of one of their memebers (iowa).

Great. You and the old lady do not support an originalist interpretation of this document. And that means this link is our constitution?

https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/publications/icnst/402726.pdf

 

[Slappy Pappy]

I guess you can just chill now iclown, since you're so confident that if ISU gets left out of the upcoming B12/ACC merger, they can just tap Iowa for 50% of its B1G revenue. ISU is golden whoever Tejas & Okie decide to partner with in the future! You and Jimmy P can kick back and pop some cold ones and enjoy the show this summer.

 

[STPGopherfan]

What about the Big 8 plus Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Illinois? Wonder if that ever was discussed.

IIRC Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, and Purdue are charter members of the BigTen, with Iowa joining shortly there after. With that said, I don't see those teams leaving. They might, but I'm not sure I see it.

 

[myteamcanbeatupyourteam]

That sounds like a stretch. I remember the talk of Northwestern leaving, but I never heard of ISU replacing them. I think that's wishful thinking on your part and not fact.

^^^This

 

[CO_hawk]

IIRC Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, and Purdue are charter members of the BigTen, with Iowa joining shortly there after. With that said, I don't see those teams leaving. They might, but I'm not sure I see it.

My statement was in past tense, meaning what if.