(11-06-2014 11:04 AM)Niner National Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 10:57 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I will go on record and say that if UAB feels their football program benefits the University then the board shouldn't be so quick to dismiss it.

There has been a growing level of fraction within the system. But UAB is akin to an automaton. It serves a limited purpose, and very well. If football is valuable to that then the board should consider it an investment in the context of that role.

So, does football attract health science students to UAB?

Limited purpose? It is the biggest economic contributor in your state.

This is where it is important to be specific.

UAB is not. The UAB Hospital is. The UAB Hospital is run by two organizations, The University of Alabama Medical Education Program and the University of Alabama School of Medicine. The UAB Hospital is thus a quasi independent organization.

I'd kind of guess if UAB left CUSA the odds on favorite to replace them would be Georgia State. Location location location.

(11-06-2014 11:13 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 10:51 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 10:43 AM)Love and Honor Wrote:  If I'm not mistaken, the Alabama BoT has also made life difficult for the UAH hockey team as well.

I'm far from familiar with the whole situation, but it seems like the objective here is to cut systemwide expenses without harming the Tuscaloosa campus at all. God forbid they stop pouring money into Crimson Tide athletics (116 million in overall athletic expenses for Bama vs. 27 million for UAB, Saban's salary of 7.3 million vs. Clark's of 600k). I know that one athletic program makes a lot of money and the other bleeds it, but if they want to cut expenses overall they could probably spread it around the system instead of one huge cut in addition to shrinking UAB's undergrad presence.

The problem is in the idea that there is a "Tuscaloosa campus."

That's not how it is set up, as per the Constitution. There is only UA in the Bot's mind. UAH and UAB serve a specialized role pursuant to UA's mandate to educate the people of the state. That is the limit of their standing.

The Univ. System of Alabama has 3 units, one Birmingham, Tuscaloosa and Huntsville. Why would they want to shutter one of states top research facilities?

They aren't.

However, UAB without the medical school is not much of anything. The UAB Hospital and the UA medical school are all part of a soup of entanglements.

(11-06-2014 11:24 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 10:51 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 10:43 AM)Love and Honor Wrote:  If I'm not mistaken, the Alabama BoT has also made life difficult for the UAH hockey team as well.

I'm far from familiar with the whole situation, but it seems like the objective here is to cut systemwide expenses without harming the Tuscaloosa campus at all. God forbid they stop pouring money into Crimson Tide athletics (116 million in overall athletic expenses for Bama vs. 27 million for UAB, Saban's salary of 7.3 million vs. Clark's of 600k). I know that one athletic program makes a lot of money and the other bleeds it, but if they want to cut expenses overall they could probably spread it around the system instead of one huge cut in addition to shrinking UAB's undergrad presence.

The problem is in the idea that there is a "Tuscaloosa campus."

That's not how it is set up, as per the Constitution. There is only UA in the Bot's mind. UAH and UAB serve a specialized role pursuant to UA's mandate to educate the people of the state. That is the limit of their standing.

From what I can tell from public sources, UA (located in Tuscaloosa) is one of three autonomous universities within the University of Alabama System. Each of the three is is headed by a President, who is appointed by and reports to The Chancellor of The University of Alabama. That chancellor is the Chairman of the Board of Trustees, a 15 member body located in Tuscaloosa. Three of its members must come from the congressional district that includes Tuscaloosa, and two members from each of the other Alabama congressional districts.

UA does not have its own BOT. A single BOT governs all three schools. A precursor to the current rumors about UAB's football program occurred in 2011, when the BOT refused to consider a proposal to build a new, on campus football stadium for UAB to replace a dilapidated and outdated Legion Field. No vote was taken on the proposal. It was simply tabled.

As far as Alabama's Constitution, good luck discerning any coherent intent from that document, which is the longest constitution in the world, thanks to roughly 900 amendments.

There is only a single board of trustees. That board acts as the board for all three schools. But, as a legal entity, and a governing body, it exists purely as the BOT for the University of Alabama.

On the face it seems complicated but it really isn't. UAH and UAB are extensions. Unlike other systems where you have three letters, like the University of Wisconsin, Madison, you have at and in designations. UAH is the University of Alabama IN Huntsville. UAB is the University of Alabama AT Birmingham. The reason for that is the constitutional limitations imposed. UAH and UAB are products of an expansive reading of the mandate. However, other parts of that mandate are much clearer and the BoT has duties to the University of Alabama, full stop. The others exist at the will of the Board and their standing extends only as far as the Board says it does.

(11-06-2014 11:30 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 10:19 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 09:04 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Looking at FBS Schedule site, UAB has not games scheduled past 2016. Guess the question will be does CUSA stay at 13 or look to replace. If they raid, seems like GSo, USA, GST and Troy would be the best candidates. I think GA Southern would be the best football choice but Georgia State might be the best market choice.

UAB leaving would leave a big hole in CUSA geographically.

Its hard to say who they could turn to filling it. There are 2 more Alabama G5 schools and 2 Georgia schools. There is also the idea of going after Ark State or ULL to balance out the West division better. Its possible CUSA goes to 16 in response to keep everyone happy with the choices.

Another thought is if CUSA added South Alabama would UAB be a slam dunk to return to the Sun Belt? UAB would remain a G5 in the SBC a conference with a decent national name. Its a better deal than the OVC or ASun. CUSA and SBC commissioners could work out a deal to trade the two schools.

So I guess if you think UAB will be toast athletically without CUSA you are forgetting the SBC is out there as a solid fall back option.

UAB would not have the votes to get into the SBC without football. Presidents are trying to move away from the non football school motto. UALR is a historic member and keeps its spot for that reason, and UTA balances things out. No one else will get consideration.

I don't think Arkansas State would accept a CUSA invite. Not in its current structure. ULL would. USA might.

The best solution to all of this is for UAB alums to put pressure on the legislature to allow them to separate from Tuscaloosa. Join another system, or become their own school.

That is theoretically possible, but it could no longer be the University of Alabama anything and the medical school would be severed from the school. What is left would effectively be UNA or Troy. To leave would be death.

(11-06-2014 11:20 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 11:05 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  With the full cost of attendance coming down the road now may be a good time to pull the plug on a few FBS programs.

Rice has always been in a tough spot as an elite university in a region without elite universities. Very small enrollment and almost zero chance at getting into the B12. I could see where they would want to bow out but the question is where do they go? This is where I could see the SBC stepping in and offering a home for any southern programs that consider dropping.

Imagine if the SBC could get Rice/UAB non-FB to join while cutting the cord on Idaho and NMSU. I definitely think it would make the SBC more appealing for a school like James Madison to join. Rice could play in the Pioneer League non-scholarship ball if it wanted.

The only MAC school that has considered a move down in recent years was Bowling Green. They have struggled with enrollment and cut full time faculty. The hockey program couldn't get into the NCHC when the CCHA broke up. That said they do have a nice donor base and a good football team so the MAC is happy with them.

ULM and EMU are a couple of schools from an institutional perspective don't belong at the FBS level. Will the full cost of attendance make it past their BOT? Will an event like ULL moving to CUSA convince ULM to drop out of the SBC?

Rice and UAB leave CUSA in advance of a TV contract negotiation what does it mean for the future of the conference? Does the MWC look at the situation and think they can pull in UTEP/UTSA?

I'm not following your logic. Rice has no problem funding their football program, and they've been quite successful recently. They are a private school with no say by the state. I'd say they are in a better position than most of the schools around them. As far as academic peers: Tulane is right next door, and they can always try to schedule Texas for big payday games where fans actually care due to the historic ties.

I'm looking more at Rice's small enrollment and mission at odds with fielding a CUSA level football program.

There is no equivalent to the University Athletic Association (Division 3) for Rice in their region which has University of Chicago and NYU in it. That is more of the type of conference Rice belongs in than anything D1. As for academic peers maybe Tulane but that is about it. SMU and TCU aren't really even peers.

The Rice administration could get sick of the whole P5/G5 set up but want to keep baseball at a high level so they could drop FB and move into the SBC. I'm not saying this will happen but this is a conversation about candidates that would potentially like to get out of the game.

Tulane if you recall only a few years ago discussed moving down to DIII but they got into the AAC and built the new stadium.

I don't see Tulsa getting out of the game with their level of community support as the 3rd Division 1 program in Oklahoma. They've got that remodeled stadium. They've had a nice run over the past decade.

Could the academies say the new rules of FBS just aren't for us and decide to move to FCS? Or not play by the rules and go independent? Does UMass have to offer full cost of attendance if they aren't in a football conference?

(11-06-2014 11:33 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I'd kind of guess if UAB left CUSA the odds on favorite to replace them would be Georgia State. Location location location.

CUSA has a running debate as to who belongs in the East and who belongs in the West division. UAB wants to be in the East but you've got to keep WKU/MTSU, ODU/Charlotte, Marshall, FAU/FIU all over there.

That is why the move might be to go after ULL. A nice rival for UNT, LaTech and Southern Miss. Pushing the football stadium to 40,000 seats. They would definitely be playing in the West.

I expect Southern Miss as a founding member will have a lot of say on who gets let in and I'd expect them to push back on letting South Alabama or Troy into the conference.

Georgia Southern over Georgia State if I had to pick a Georgia school because of winning. That said I don't think either make sense in the near term due to being such new FBS programs. It makes more sense to go with ULL a school that could give them a shot in the arm in bowl games and wants to be in there long term with LaTech/USM.

(11-06-2014 11:43 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 11:30 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 10:19 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 09:04 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Looking at FBS Schedule site, UAB has not games scheduled past 2016. Guess the question will be does CUSA stay at 13 or look to replace. If they raid, seems like GSo, USA, GST and Troy would be the best candidates. I think GA Southern would be the best football choice but Georgia State might be the best market choice.

UAB leaving would leave a big hole in CUSA geographically.

Its hard to say who they could turn to filling it. There are 2 more Alabama G5 schools and 2 Georgia schools. There is also the idea of going after Ark State or ULL to balance out the West division better. Its possible CUSA goes to 16 in response to keep everyone happy with the choices.

Another thought is if CUSA added South Alabama would UAB be a slam dunk to return to the Sun Belt? UAB would remain a G5 in the SBC a conference with a decent national name. Its a better deal than the OVC or ASun. CUSA and SBC commissioners could work out a deal to trade the two schools.

So I guess if you think UAB will be toast athletically without CUSA you are forgetting the SBC is out there as a solid fall back option.

UAB would not have the votes to get into the SBC without football. Presidents are trying to move away from the non football school motto. UALR is a historic member and keeps its spot for that reason, and UTA balances things out. No one else will get consideration.

I don't think Arkansas State would accept a CUSA invite. Not in its current structure. ULL would. USA might.

The best solution to all of this is for UAB alums to put pressure on the legislature to allow them to separate from Tuscaloosa. Join another system, or become their own school.

That is theoretically possible, but it could no longer be the University of Alabama anything and the medical school would be severed from the school. What is left would effectively be UNA or Troy. To leave would be death.

They'd lose a medical school, but still have the benefit of being able to recruit students from Birmingham, which essentially lacks a college without UAB. No offense to Birmingham Southern.

If I was in a high up position to UAB and had any pull, I would be on the phone with Auburn right now trying to see if they would be interested. My bet is the Tigers would be very interested in attaching their name to the Birmingham market.

School's leave systems all the time. All depends on local laws, and a required name change.

Chanting something many times does not make it true.

The Alabama Constitution was amended in November 1977. The University of Alabama System has three co-equal campuses, each with its own president reporting to a Chancellor who in turn reports to the Board of Trustees. The University of Alabama no longer has ANY primacy over the other two campuses, per the state constitution. You may educate yourself here:

http://uasystem.ua.edu/board-of-trustees/board-manual/

This entire charade is an embarrassment to the State and the University of Alabama. I am sickened by the sight of those purporting to represent my alma mater acting like spoiled children, eager to bully a smaller child.

I have not seen UAB play football in at least 10 years, but I will be in Legion Field Saturday morning to stand with the Blazers. This is an evil act perpetrated by evil, greedy and very, very small men. **** evil. You want to fight my little brother, then you have to fight me too.

(11-06-2014 12:00 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 11:43 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 11:30 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 10:19 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 09:04 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Looking at FBS Schedule site, UAB has not games scheduled past 2016. Guess the question will be does CUSA stay at 13 or look to replace. If they raid, seems like GSo, USA, GST and Troy would be the best candidates. I think GA Southern would be the best football choice but Georgia State might be the best market choice.

UAB leaving would leave a big hole in CUSA geographically.

Its hard to say who they could turn to filling it. There are 2 more Alabama G5 schools and 2 Georgia schools. There is also the idea of going after Ark State or ULL to balance out the West division better. Its possible CUSA goes to 16 in response to keep everyone happy with the choices.

Another thought is if CUSA added South Alabama would UAB be a slam dunk to return to the Sun Belt? UAB would remain a G5 in the SBC a conference with a decent national name. Its a better deal than the OVC or ASun. CUSA and SBC commissioners could work out a deal to trade the two schools.

So I guess if you think UAB will be toast athletically without CUSA you are forgetting the SBC is out there as a solid fall back option.

UAB would not have the votes to get into the SBC without football. Presidents are trying to move away from the non football school motto. UALR is a historic member and keeps its spot for that reason, and UTA balances things out. No one else will get consideration.

I don't think Arkansas State would accept a CUSA invite. Not in its current structure. ULL would. USA might.

The best solution to all of this is for UAB alums to put pressure on the legislature to allow them to separate from Tuscaloosa. Join another system, or become their own school.

That is theoretically possible, but it could no longer be the University of Alabama anything and the medical school would be severed from the school. What is left would effectively be UNA or Troy. To leave would be death.

They'd lose a medical school, but still have the benefit of being able to recruit students from Birmingham, which essentially lacks a college without UAB. No offense to Birmingham Southern.

If I was in a high up position to UAB and had any pull, I would be on the phone with Auburn right now trying to see if they would be interested. My bet is the Tigers would be very interested in attaching their name to the Birmingham market.

School's leave systems all the time. All depends on local laws, and a required name change.

And Samford, the state's best private school.

It is a real dilemma, if they left there would essentially be nothing left.

Auburn already has AUM.

Throwing out a Full Lifetime scholarship realignment scenario....

-UAB drops and replaced with ULL in CUSA.

-The academies decide they won't enforce a full lifetime scholarship so AFA and Navy go independent.

-Hawaii thought about dropping FB and doesn't feel like playing in the MWC where they'll need to balance stipends in other sports so they'll drop out and play as an independent.

-MWC adds UTEP/UTSA as replacements for Hawaii/Air Force.

-AAC adds Georgia State as a replacement for Navy.

-CUSA brings in Ark State/TxState as replacements for UTEP/UTSA.

-New Mexico St joins the BW/Indy in FB to avoid having to pay the full cost of attendance. Idaho does the same with the Big Sky.

-SBC schools can't find anyone except Liberty to join and don't want to pay for the full cost of attendance so opt to go independent.

Then what you have is two groups of Independents, one in the East and one in the West that aren't paying the full cost of attendance and mostly content with mediocre football performance.

West: Hawaii, Idaho, New Mexico St, Air Force, BYU
East: Umass, Navy, Army, App St, Georgia So, Troy, USA, ULM

App St and Georgia So on the bench for CUSA when the next major realignment comes around. ULM maybe decides to get out of the game.

(11-06-2014 12:03 PM)Proud Bammer Wrote:  Chanting something many times does not make it true.

The Alabama Constitution was amended in November 1977. The University of Alabama System has three co-equal campuses, each with its own president reporting to a Chancellor who in turn reports to the Board of Trustees. The University of Alabama no longer has ANY primacy over the other two campuses, per the state constitution. You may educate yourself here:

http://uasystem.ua.edu/board-of-trustees/board-manual/

This entire charade is an embarrassment to the State and the University of Alabama. I am sickened by the sight of those purporting to represent my alma mater acting like spoiled children, eager to bully a smaller child.

I have not seen UAB play football in at least 10 years, but I will be in Legion Field Saturday morning to stand with the Blazers. This is an evil act perpetrated by evil, greedy and very, very small men. **** evil. You want to fight my little brother, then you have to fight me too.

No, it isn't.

You should have read what you posted.

"Alabama, each with a role and scope to be prescribed by the Board."

For the record, the Board's guide is not the Constitution, embarrassing for UA indeed.

(11-06-2014 09:43 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 09:30 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 09:09 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I can't say I'm surprised. It's a waste of resources anyways.

UAB needs to be refocused on their original mission. There isn't enough money to support these types of things that merely drain the resources of the whole system.

It sucks for the fans though. But, such is the life of an extension school.

The BOT has been slowly moving much of the teaching in the medical school, which is the UA School of Medicine, back to Tuscaloosa. Without that UAB is largely without purpose.

That's pretty ridiculous. As had been said above, the state's largest city without a university?

But they don't necessarily need to play FBS football.

Yes. I was responding to the "UAB is largely without purpose."

(11-06-2014 10:51 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 10:43 AM)Love and Honor Wrote:  If I'm not mistaken, the Alabama BoT has also made life difficult for the UAH hockey team as well.

I'm far from familiar with the whole situation, but it seems like the objective here is to cut systemwide expenses without harming the Tuscaloosa campus at all. God forbid they stop pouring money into Crimson Tide athletics (116 million in overall athletic expenses for Bama vs. 27 million for UAB, Saban's salary of 7.3 million vs. Clark's of 600k). I know that one athletic program makes a lot of money and the other bleeds it, but if they want to cut expenses overall they could probably spread it around the system instead of one huge cut in addition to shrinking UAB's undergrad presence.

The problem is in the idea that there is a "Tuscaloosa campus."

That's not how it is set up, as per the Constitution. There is only UA in the Bot's mind. UAH and UAB serve a specialized role pursuant to UA's mandate to educate the people of the state. That is the limit of their standing.

Then why don't they just shut down Tuscaloosa and move it all to Birmingham? That's a lot closer to the population of the state than Tuscaloosa.

(11-06-2014 11:32 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 11:04 AM)Niner National Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 10:57 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I will go on record and say that if UAB feels their football program benefits the University then the board shouldn't be so quick to dismiss it.

There has been a growing level of fraction within the system. But UAB is akin to an automaton. It serves a limited purpose, and very well. If football is valuable to that then the board should consider it an investment in the context of that role.

So, does football attract health science students to UAB?

Limited purpose? It is the biggest economic contributor in your state.

This is where it is important to be specific.

UAB is not. The UAB Hospital is. The UAB Hospital is run by two organizations, The University of Alabama Medical Education Program and the University of Alabama School of Medicine. The UAB Hospital is thus a quasi independent organization.

UAB still gets listed in the top 300 in the ARWU university rankings. Tuscaloosa is nowhere to be seen. UAB is the 2nd highest rated general purpose school NOT in the AAU on the AAU rankings they used when kicking out Nebraska, behind only Dartmouth. They are #40 on that list, so they are ranked ahead of almost half the AAU schools.
So even if most is due to the medical school, as much as you want to deny it, it IS UAB.

(11-06-2014 12:35 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 10:51 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  [quote='Love and Honor' pid='11338799' dateline='1415288623']
If I'm not mistaken, the Alabama BoT has also made life difficult for the UAH hockey team as well.

I'm far from familiar with the whole situation, but it seems like the objective here is to cut systemwide expenses without harming the Tuscaloosa campus at all. God forbid they stop pouring money into Crimson Tide athletics (116 million in overall athletic expenses for Bama vs. 27 million for UAB, Saban's salary of 7.3 million vs. Clark's of 600k). I know that one athletic program makes a lot of money and the other bleeds it, but if they want to cut expenses overall they could probably spread it around the system instead of one huge cut in addition to shrinking UAB's undergrad presence.

The problem is in the idea that there is a "Tuscaloosa campus."

That's not how it is set up, as per the Constitution. There is only UA in the Bot's mind. UAH and UAB serve a specialized role pursuant to UA's mandate to educate the people of the state. That is the limit of their standing.

Then why don't they just shut down Tuscaloosa and move it all to Birmingham? That's a lot closer to the population of the state than Tuscaloosa.


If the sincere interest here is the "people of the state" and most of the "people of the state" are in the Birmingham area the BOT does seem to be going against the interests of most of the "people of the state". They are deciding not to follow their mandate.

(11-06-2014 12:47 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 11:32 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 11:04 AM)Niner National Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 10:57 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I will go on record and say that if UAB feels their football program benefits the University then the board shouldn't be so quick to dismiss it.

There has been a growing level of fraction within the system. But UAB is akin to an automaton. It serves a limited purpose, and very well. If football is valuable to that then the board should consider it an investment in the context of that role.

So, does football attract health science students to UAB?

Limited purpose? It is the biggest economic contributor in your state.

This is where it is important to be specific.

UAB is not. The UAB Hospital is. The UAB Hospital is run by two organizations, The University of Alabama Medical Education Program and the University of Alabama School of Medicine. The UAB Hospital is thus a quasi independent organization.

UAB still gets listed in the top 300 in the ARWU university rankings. Tuscaloosa is nowhere to be seen. UAB is the 2nd highest rated general purpose school NOT in the AAU on the AAU rankings they used when kicking out Nebraska, behind only Dartmouth. They are #40 on that list, so they are ranked ahead of almost half the AAU schools.
So even if most is due to the medical school, as much as you want to deny it, it IS UAB.

That is due to how the ranking group chooses to interpret the organization of the schools.

The medical school is world class, nobody denies that. It is however accredited as the University of Alabama School of Medicine and is quasi-independant of UAB.

I hear what you are trying to assert HoD but then why did the UA system allow Huntsille and Birmingham to have their own campuses, mascots, athletic programs and all that goes along with it if they are nothing more that satellite campuses for Alabama?

************

TO UAB fans, is that #freeuab thing still going on?

The "dirt" on Tuscaloosa for holding down UAB and their plans is beyond belief.

(11-06-2014 12:20 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 12:03 PM)Proud Bammer Wrote:  Chanting something many times does not make it true.

The Alabama Constitution was amended in November 1977. The University of Alabama System has three co-equal campuses, each with its own president reporting to a Chancellor who in turn reports to the Board of Trustees. The University of Alabama no longer has ANY primacy over the other two campuses, per the state constitution. You may educate yourself here:

http://uasystem.ua.edu/board-of-trustees/board-manual/

This entire charade is an embarrassment to the State and the University of Alabama. I am sickened by the sight of those purporting to represent my alma mater acting like spoiled children, eager to bully a smaller child.

I have not seen UAB play football in at least 10 years, but I will be in Legion Field Saturday morning to stand with the Blazers. This is an evil act perpetrated by evil, greedy and very, very small men. **** evil. You want to fight my little brother, then you have to fight me too.

No, it isn't.

You should have read what you posted.

"Alabama, each with a role and scope to be prescribed by the Board."

For the record, the Board's guide is not the Constitution, embarrassing for UA indeed.

I suppose every fanbase has its apologists.

The Constitution does not enshrine primacy for UA over UAB and UAH. The Board's (so far potential) actions can't be whitewashed by invoking the Alabama Constitution. The Board, and the yapping t-shirt fans, can't hide behind the state constitution on this one.

UAB is a fine university in its own right and as such should have all the amenities thereof: including football. Mine was nine inches long before UAB had football, it was nine inches long after UAB started football, and it will remain nine inches long should UAB lose football. And I'm pretty sure we hung repeated NC banners WHILE UAB had football. UAB's prominence does not diminish UA - but acting like a pack of six-year-old bullies circling the nerdy kid on the playground sure as hell does.

(11-06-2014 01:06 PM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  I hear what you are trying to assert HoD but then why did the UA system allow Huntsille and Birmingham to have their own campuses, mascots, athletic programs and all that goes along with it if they are nothing more that satellite campuses for Alabama?

************

TO UAB fans, is that #freeuab thing still going on?

The "dirt" on Tuscaloosa for holding down UAB and their plans is beyond belief.

In large part it has to do with how the population of the state grew in the 20th century.

The University was looking for a way that it could expand and not upset their mandate. Well, the Constitution does not limit how the University goes about its internal structure. The best way to expand was by way of an expansive reading of the mandate and justifying expansion by saying it is in line with educating the people of the state. However, the BoT is set in stone and the limitations are not negotiable.

It breaks like this, the University and the Board can expand in whatever way they wish, and designate whatever they wish, as long as it does not conflict with their fiduciary duties to UA. That has been happening for basically 40 years. It has grown way beyond what the school ever thought it would.

Today, the board walks a fine line in order to avoid conflicts that would require it to crush certain parts of UAH or UAB. They tabled the stadium bid because it would have triggered a conflict and opened the floodgates, in their estimation, for asking other substantive questions which would great harm UAH and UAB.

This isn't about holding anybody down, not one bit. It is just the reality. UA has expanded in the best interests of the people of the state. People would do well to remember that the interests of the people and the interests of UAB football fans, UAB homers, or disaffected alums are not the same thing.