- Joined: Dec 3, 2011
- Last Login: Sep 20, 2021, 9:12am EDT
- Posts: 7
- Comments: 9,180
1991 KSU alum -- Education and English. Eight years teaching and coaching in Jetmore, Kansas. Lawyer in Topeka since 2002.
Share this profile
Comment 5 recs
Comment 3 replies, 9 recs
Comment 1 reply, 2 recs
Comment 1 reply, 2 recs
Also, while NBAF certainly provides a positive economic injection in Manhattan and the surrounding region
we should all remember that then-president Wefald went around after the site was awarded crowing that it would double the population of Manhattan in short order. That has obviously turned out to be sky-pie that never materialized.
Comment 1 reply, 8 recs
Actually had NBAF included in the original post.
Deleted it because the topic is rife with conflict for some. But the fact that the university was thriving at the time certainly played a role in being awarded the site, for better or worse. And again, we can’t give football all the credit. But it did elevate K-State in the collective consciousness and likley played some role, even if indirectly.
Comment 5 recs
I need a weekend. Desperately.
Who’s with me?
Comment 2 replies, 14 recs
If we were only talking about football/athletics, I'd be with you 100%
But the fallout of realignment will be much, much bigger than that.
I graduated in 1991, just before Snyder’s approach started to pay dividends. And everything in Manhattan changed. The success of football at K-State spurred growth on campus and in the Manhattan community. The library, new dorms, apartments, new engineering and business buildings, the entire Colbert Hills complex. Football was not the only reason for those things, but its success certainly played a role in those improvements. Renewed interest in K-State brought renewed investment.
If the football program shrinks, the university suffers, the community suffers, the economy suffers. In human terms, people lose jobs and businesses go belly-up. I wish it weren’t so pivotal, but I believe it is. If we wind up falling out of the major sports divisions, the consequences will go far beyond game day experience and what trophy we play for.
Comment 1 reply, 4 recs
You guys are missing that every turn of the realignment wheel
since we added the Texas schools, has diminished the Big 12. We are not an attractive destination to anybody who has had Power-5 affiliation elsewhere. Even with the additions being contemplated, we are the league in the most dire straits—Not the Pac 12. We’re the most poachable because of geography, and the more lucrative leagues just demonstrated that they can take the best and leave the rest of us scrambling for survival.
The Pac 12 has its problems, for sure, many of them owing to distance and time zone. But its long-term viability prospects are infinitely better than our own, as long as they don’t have an internal war of some kind.
Comment 2 replies, 10 recs
I'm unhappy about all of it.
Not to denigrate any of these schools. We need them to preserve anything like the status quo. But it’s nothing more than the least offensive of the available excrement sandwiches. Every step of conference realignment has made college sports generally, as well as the leagues and most of the programs involved, worse in some way. Most especially the Big 12.
Even the schools who charted their own course to secure their futures (Nebraska, Colorado, A&M, and to a lesser extent, Mizzou, since they never won much of anything here, either) have gained nothing but money. If that’s what colleges sports is all about, then yay for them, I guess. But from where I sit, not one of those programs improved competitively by moving. In fact, I think they all regressed.
I see no reason to be excited about the latest changes. They are just another stopgap. A temporary fix. Every school currently "committed" to the Big 12 would jump ship at the first opportunity to join one of the Power 4. That includes (and should include) K-State. All we are really doing is giving these new members a platform to spring past us. Don’t be surprised if, in the end, we lose our seat at the big-boy table to one of these more urban schools who up to now have been considered mid-majors. Apparently, demographics are all that matters. So tell me: Who in the newly-constituted Big 12 is less attractive demographically than K-State?
Oh, and happy Thursday, everyone.
Comment 8 recs