Liberty next SBC addition?

[bcoach]

I always thought it was about them trying to move the ACC tournament to New York.

[Gonzo]

Tolerance seems OK only if it agrees with your personal views.

Do you realize that what most of these people are intolerant of is intolerance.

The same culture (Southern Christians) that oppressed black people for 200 years is oppressing homosexuals today. No amount of martyrdom will provide a moral high ground for Liberty U, a exemplification of that same age-old hatred and INTOLERANCE.

I love how the zealots love to blame slavery and racism on the Old South and Southern Christians in particular and give the north a pass. Truth is the overwhelming majority of slaves were brought to the US by ships owned and operated by northern industrialists. The others by European trading companies. Not one slave can be traced to being brought here on a ship under the flag of a Southern state. It is taught slavery had been abolished throughout New England by 1804, but the 1800 census shows 1,488 slaves still in New England. Slaves were auctioned openly in the Market House of Philadelphia, in Rhode Island, in Boston taverns and warehouses and sometimes daily in Merchant's Coffee House of New York. While the North failed to develop large-scale agrarian slavery, such as later arose in the Deep South, it had little to do with morality and much to do with climate and economy. Why are the African tribal leaders who raided other villages and sold their captives to these "traders" are never held accountable for any wrongdoing? These ship captains did not put to shore and send people into the jungle to rounding up these people. They were already enslaved by their own countrymen. For some reason these parts of history are always ignored in the discussion.

I never mentioned slavery, I was merely referring to the culture of hate that characterized the American south well into the twentieth century. I'm actually quite the Civil War buff.

What I am attempting to do is draw what I believe to be an easy connection between this:



And this:

Any true "buff" in the South does not to call it The Civil War.

That is its common name. If it makes you feel any better, I call "Bull Run" Manassas.

[StumpyCulbreath]

Way back when I was in school, they taught us that it was over the rights of armed bears.

[Kgfish]

Give it up, Gonzo. You're no match for the Wikipedia historian.

The hardest thing about arguing with religious folks is that they have eternal hell fire to motivate them. I'm just trying to avoid working...

And you've been doing a fine job of it...if I do say so myself...

If Christians are wrong they really lose nothing, if non Christians are wrong than ......well you know.

[Kgfish]

Way back when I was in school, they taught us that it was over the rights of armed bears.

That was primarily in the Western Campaign of Jellystone Park.

[Gonzo]

A comparison of mostly Democrats who fought against integration to mostly Tea Party Conservatives who are against homosexual marriage is quite a reach. BTW, any true "buff" in the South does not to refer to that as The Civil War.

You do realize that the party names basically switched in the 70's right? Those that used to be Dems are Reps and Visa Versa. People that opposed racial integration were social conservatives, just as those that oppose marriage equality today are social conservatives. It is the same issue of hate/cultural arrogance of the 60's and there are almost identical demographics on that particular side of the issue.

[bcoach]

A comparison of mostly Democrats who fought against integration to mostly Tea Party Conservatives who are against homosexual marriage is quite a reach. BTW, any true "buff" in the South does not to refer to that as The Civil War.

You do realize that the party names basically switched in the 70's right? Those that used to be Dems are Reps and Visa Versa. People that opposed racial integration were social conservatives, just as those that oppose marriage equality today are social conservatives. It is the same issue of hate/cultural arrogance of the 60's and there are almost identical demographics on that particular side of the issue.

So did they like all meet somewhere and switch jerseys?

[skjellyfetti]

BTW, any true "buff" in the South does not to refer to that as The Civil War.

Shelby Foote had more Civil War knowledge and southerness than everyone here put together... and he called it the Civil War. Guess he was just a scalawag historian, though.

[StumpyCulbreath]

I drove Foote around for a couple hours when he came here to speak. He told me he was absolutely sick of the Civil War and the re-enactment that they put on for him everywhere he went. Of course, that's what they did here.

[Appsolutely]

A comparison of mostly Democrats who fought against integration to mostly Tea Party Conservatives who are against homosexual marriage is quite a reach. BTW, any true "buff" in the South does not to refer to that as The Civil War.

You do realize that the party names basically switched in the 70's right? Those that used to be Dems are Reps and Visa Versa. People that opposed racial integration were social conservatives, just as those that oppose marriage equality today are social conservatives. It is the same issue of hate/cultural arrogance of the 60's and there are almost identical demographics on that particular side of the issue.

Yep, the Solid South (Democrats) began to move to the Republican Party in the election of 1964 and Nixon had a very well-thought-out strategy to continue that trend in 1968. That's when what had been a solid Democratic south turned the election map into what you see today--an almost solid red (Republican) south. Most political scientists say this happened for two reasons (1) Southern opposition to the Civil Rights Act and (2) improving economic conditions for Southerners.

[newtoasu]

A comparison of mostly Democrats who fought against integration to mostly Tea Party Conservatives who are against homosexual marriage is quite a reach. BTW, any true "buff" in the South does not to refer to that as The Civil War.

You do realize that the party names basically switched in the 70's right? Those that used to be Dems are Reps and Visa Versa. People that opposed racial integration were social conservatives, just as those that oppose marriage equality today are social conservatives. It is the same issue of hate/cultural arrogance of the 60's and there are almost identical demographics on that particular side of the issue.

Yep, the Solid South (Democrats) began to move to the Republican Party in the election of 1964 and Nixon had a very well-thought-out strategy to continue that trend in 1968. That's when what had been a solid Democratic south turned the election map into what you see today--an almost solid red (Republican) south. Most political scientists say this happened for two reasons (1)Southern opposition to civil rights and (2) improving economic conditions for Southerners.

"According to the legend, LBJ admitted to White House aides that his signing of the Civil Rights Act would hand the South to the Republican Party for generations to come." (cite: http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/book ... voice.html )

[Appsolutely]

A comparison of mostly Democrats who fought against integration to mostly Tea Party Conservatives who are against homosexual marriage is quite a reach. BTW, any true "buff" in the South does not to refer to that as The Civil War.

You do realize that the party names basically switched in the 70's right? Those that used to be Dems are Reps and Visa Versa. People that opposed racial integration were social conservatives, just as those that oppose marriage equality today are social conservatives. It is the same issue of hate/cultural arrogance of the 60's and there are almost identical demographics on that particular side of the issue.

Yep, the Solid South (Democrats) began to move to the Republican Party in the election of 1964 and Nixon had a very well-thought-out strategy to continue that trend in 1968. That's when what had been a solid Democratic south turned the election map into what you see today--an almost solid red (Republican) south. Most political scientists say this happened for two reasons (1)Southern opposition to civil rights and (2) improving economic conditions for Southerners.

"According to the legend, LBJ admitted to White House aides that his signing of the Civil Rights Act would hand the South to the Republican Party for generations to come." (cite: http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/book ... voice.html )

He was right.

[TheMoody1]

http://www.ajc.com/weblogs/georgia-stat ... g-liberty/


Sun Belt acknowledges talking to Liberty

April 9, 2013
Sun Belt Commissioner Karl Benson said he has had conversations with Liberty regarding their interest in joining the Sun Belt.
He declined to provide any details of their conversations.
The Sun Belt, Georgia State’s home conference officially on July 1, currently has 11 football-playing schools. The conference reached 12 with the recent additions of Georgia Southern and Appalachian State in all sports, and Idaho and New Mexico State in football only. However, Western Kentucky then announced that it was leaving the Sun Belt to join Conference USA.
The Sun Belt is trying to solve two issues: reaching 12 football-playing members so that it can host a championship game in 2014, and trying to have 12 basketball-playing members. Adding New Mexico State in all sports, for example, would solve the basketball issue, but wouldn’t solve the football issue.
Adding Liberty – again not a done deal and based upon the wording of Benson's answer, perhaps a one-sided conversation -- would solve both.
I mentioned James Madison as a school the Sun Belt was interested in adding a few weeks ago. It appears that the Dukes aren’t ready to declare their FBS intentions, and won’t be by the NCAA’s annual deadline of June 1. Benson again declined to comment.
The Flames, located in Lynchburg, Va., have been interested in joining an FBS league for the past two years. Liberty athletic director Jeff Barber said on April 2 that he was in talks with the Sun Belt.
Liberty, currently a member of the Big South Conference, would bring renovated facilities that I’m told are as good as anyone on the mid-major level. I’ve been told they are comparable to Appalachian State’s facilities. (I haven’t been there so I have no first-hand knowledge).
In football, the Flames won the Big South in 2007 and ’08.
In men’s basketball, the Flames have reached the NCAA tournament three times.
In baseball, the Flames have reached the NCAA tournament three times.
The downside is the potential addition of Liberty doesn’t bring a rivalry with any of the Sun Belt’s schools. Also, the school was started by Jerry Falwell, which could bring issues that I’ll leave up to you to debate.

[asu66]

No need for a debate. The new SBC member will definitely be Ashmore Business College. Wright Waters and Roachel Laney have led the lobbying effort to get 'em in. How's Ashmore for value added?

[fjblair]

Please. No.

[MountainMan]

No. NO. ..... and Please NO!

If it happens, it happens, but I still hope not.

[ASUTodd]

Who the heck cares who the Belt adds........ let'em add liberty, jax st, jmwho.... I don't care. The point is this. The Belt has to have teams to stay alive. Its very simple what we need to do. We worry about App State, recruit and go out and win every Sun Belt game.....We dominate the conference and in turn the recognition will come our way. Its how Boise St did it.

[kiddbrewer]

Who the heck cares who the Belt adds........ let'em add liberty, jax st, jmwho.... I don't care. The point is this. The Belt has to have teams to stay alive. Its very simple what we need to do. We worry about App State, recruit and go out and win every Sun Belt game.....We dominate the conference and in turn the recognition will come our way. Its how Boise St did it.

I couldn't have said it better myself. I'd prefer to not have Liberty, but if the Sun Belt decide to add them, then so be it. It will be another East Division team we can beat up on.

[vegattk]

Who the heck cares who the Belt adds........ let'em add liberty, jax st, jmwho.... I don't care. The point is this. The Belt has to have teams to stay alive. Its very simple what we need to do. We worry about App State, recruit and go out and win every Sun Belt game.....We dominate the conference and in turn the recognition will come our way. Its how Boise St did it.

I couldn't have said it better myself. I'd prefer to not have Liberty, but if the Sun Belt decide to add them, then so be it. It will be another East Division team we can beat up on.

And... it will be another team that has a location where us poor people go to for an away game...

[RankinApp]

From the appropriately named FlameThrower on AGS.

I would respond that App fans need to chill out. It is erroneous for App fans to think that the success they maintained at the FCS level will continue at the FBS level. What can App offer a recruit that any other state school cannot offer them? Absolutely nothing, I don't see any recruits picking App over UNC, NC State, Wake, Duke, or East Carolina as far as in-state recruiting. App is a regional school at best, they are not going to get big time recruits from California, Florida, Ohio, nor Texas. However, Liberty is a national school with a reach into every state. Don't think that I am putting Liberty on the same footing with BYU or Notre Dame at this time, but it is not hard to imaging top Christian athletes committing to Liberty. College football experts have said that they would not compare Liberty with Notre Dame, but if BYU can do it why not Liberty. App will never have the reach that Liberty University has in recruiting if and when they move up to FBS, App is just another state school among many others, App just doesn't stand out among their peers, lets face it there no Alabama and not going to be.

It is funny how you secular/humanist think that you have a say in who gets to join your conference(s), you don't! In the end money decides who gets in and who doesn't. Therefore, it doesn't matter how many of you people want us or not, you don't get a say. And as for making enemies with fans in any conference, I don't care. You secular/humanist mistake meekness for weakness which is a mistake on your part.

However, I realize that we are not going to agree on anything. If Liberty is accepted into a FBS conference let's wait twenty years and then compare App to Liberty.