New bill would force KU and WSU to play

[ABC]

There's an online poll up at the Lawrence Journal-World: http://www2.ljworld.com/polls/2013/f...state/results/

[jocoshock]

The only way these three schools are going to play each other is if you use the same approach that politicians use to legalize gambling, pot and other vices. Show KU the money... Then and only then will they put their religion aside for the practical and pragmatic reality of the almighty dollar...

[jocoshock]

Every person that outspokenly talked like this people ended up calling a Socialist.
Just saying

Could you elaborate on the ways that KU screwed WSU over by using the legislature to get an unfair advantage?

While I don't have the facts at hand at the moment, I heard last year that in year's past, KU had stacked the Board of Regents so heavily in their favor to the detriment of all the rest of the Regents universities, that it took legislation to balance out the board... It is pretty much common knowledge (or at least belief) that KU (and to a lesser degree KSU) opposed the establishment of WSU from the get go..

and let's face it. One could argue that any "State" run university is a socialist institution by its very existence and funding source...

If you pretend they don't exist, maybe they won't...

[1972Shocker]

The only way these three schools are going to play each other is if you use the same approach that politicians use to legalize gambling, pot and other vices. Show KU the money...

You mean, as with gambling, pot, smoking, drinking and other vices show the politicians the money...that's what happens with those vices and that is what the pols are looking for. More money in their coffers.

[im4wsu]

I would like to see KU, KjSU and WSU and one other BCS team play in a one-day doubleheader where WSU would alternate playing KU one year and KjSU the next, and the team not playing WSU would play the other BCS team. This could be done at a neutral court (KC or InTrust) or at the home of the team playing the other BCS team, so that the WSU game would be on a neutral court every year.

[Rlh04d]

As a Florida State alumni: FSU would not be the university it is today without government intervention that forced the University of Florida to play us. The bill itself actually got voted down, I believe, but the state senators forced UF to sign a contract with FSU. At the time, FSU was clearly the "little brother" in the situation, while UF was already a major program.

FSU had a decent team for years before that, but they weren't taken seriously until they started beating UF and Miami. Even while outside of a major conference, those guaranteed games against two established powers gave FSU the launching pad to become a major program themselves once they had the ability to win those games.

FSU has multiple national championships in football, multiple Heisman winners, the longest bowl streak in the country, had something like 15 straight years in the top 5 ... none of that would have happened without state government intervention. You know what makes being called the "little brother school" easy to swallow? National championships.

The situations of FSU then and WSU now are very similar. Florida used legislative power for years against FSU, for reasons that had little to do with actual athletics ... mostly as a matter of limited state funding for universities and them not wanting FSU to be considered a major university so that they could get the lion share of it. Florida correctly believed that FSU being treated as an equal in athletics would eventually turn FSU into a major competitor for state funding, and the gap between the two in academics has been shrinking ever since. The series against Florida took FSU from being a small time independent into a national power and eventually into a major conference.

(Also, while FSU and UF are very similar in regards to athletic power these days, UF still enjoys a massive advantage in legislative power thanks to their superior law school. Most politicians are lawyers, most Florida lawyers went to UF ... also likely similar to KU grads having far more power in the Kansas legislature than WSU grads. UF enjoys a similar advantage in the press due to having a stronger program there as well, and thus more media in the state being alumni.)

Don't know if we could realistically expect the same thing from games with KU and KSU, and times have changed ... but not ever having the chance to actually beat KU and KSU will forever cement WSU's place as third string in the state. Having those games happen, however it has to be made to happen, creates the possibility of WSU winning those games. If WSU proves it can stand toe to toe against those two teams, then perception changes. WSU would start to be viewed as an equal ... in ways that will benefit more than just the basketball team. It would have major ramifications in actual program respect, conference matters, state funding, education, enrollment, etc., etc. I know this, because all of those things already happened with my alma mater when the same opportunity was given by politicians.

I know plenty about the FSU/UF situation, but it's the only one I'm qualified to draw a comparison to. I'm sure many other states have similar stories that could be drawn on to explain why this is important for WSU, I'm just not knowledgable enough on them to bring them up.

[ripemupshocks]

From the same story. This dipsh*t obviously didn't follow Volleyball.

Jason Watkins, a former legislator who is now a lobbyist for the Wichita Metro Chamber of Commerce, said he introduced a bill several years ago that would have required WSU to play KU in all major sports.

He said he filed the bill at the request of a parent of a WSU volleyball player who said WSU’s team couldn’t qualify for a NCAA tournament because its strength of schedule wasn’t strong enough.

I've given up on the chickenhawks and mildcats coming to Wichita to play WSU, and don't really care anymore. I just want to kick their asses in the tournament.

[Rlh04d]

Also, as for it being a matter for politicians, all three are state schools. All take state funding. Games between those schools would create additional large games within the state, that would then benefit the state. WSU becoming a bigger program is good for the state (although bad for KU/KSU). Of course it's a matter for politicians.

I have no idea why state politicians wouldn't use their power to force schools that are publicly funded to do what is in the best interests of the state, rather than their own selfish interests.

[jocoshock]

You mean, as with gambling, pot, smoking, drinking and other vices show the politicians the money...that's what happens with those vices and that is what the pols are looking for. More money in their coffers.

That too, but I was referring to KU always saying they can't afford to give up a home game (at least partially because of the lost revenue). Show them a way to make as much or more in some sort of annual tourney with KU, KSU, WSU and other teams, where WSU would play at least one team every year, and at least you remove that excuse, and might just get them to go along...

[1972Shocker]

I would like to see the following: WSU plays KU every other year rotating from Allen to Intrust to Sprint. Then in the intervening years we play KSU at Sprint, at Bramlage, at Intrust. Or whatever rotation works best.

Those games would be the second game of the doubleheader. The 1st game would between two of the best high school boys teams in the state that year.

Split the gate 50-50 at all venues. Pay for the travel costs of the high school teams. KU loses 1/2 the gate from an Allen game and KSU loses 1/2 the gate from a Bramlage game every 6 years.

Kansas truly does become the hotbed of D-1 basketball in the nation.

[ShockerFever]

There's an online poll up at the Lawrence Journal-World: http://www2.ljworld.com/polls/2013/f...state/results/

I don't think it'll take a lot of scientific research to determine the results of a poll made up of Lawrence and JoCo residents.

[Kung Wu]

You mean, as with gambling, pot, smoking, drinking and other vices show the politicians the money...that's what happens with those vices and that is what the pols are looking for. More money in their coffers.

Hookers. You forgot the hookers.

[jocoshock]

Hookers. You forgot the hookers.

This IS a "right to work state", after all....:biggrin-new:

[RoyalShock]

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

While the universities are state schools and receive state funding, I believe the athletic departments are separate corporations (if that's the right word) and do not receive direct funding from the state. And in WSU's case I think the funds the athletic department does receive from the institution are in the form of student fees. I don't know if that's the case at KU or KSU.

I bring this up only to point out, assuming I'm correct, being state schools doesn't automatically bring athletics under the jurisdiction of the state. While I wouldn't complain if such legislation were to pass, I'd rather WSU make its case by establishing consistency at the top of the conference, in the ranking, and in the NCAA tournament.

The Florida/Florida St analogy is an interesting one, but until WSU restarts football, I don't see KU or KSU bowing to legislative pressure to sign a contract.

[tropicalshox]

There's an online poll up at the Lawrence Journal-World: http://www2.ljworld.com/polls/2013/f...state/results/

Just voted.