Notre Dame to Big 10?

[Old Pio]

Re: Notre Dame to Big 10?

Don't know if this was posted anywhere else, so forgive me if it is up somewhere.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/colle...xpansion_N.htm

Grassley and Harkin rarely agree on anything, but looking out for Iowa's financial interests in the Big 10 is evidently one. How humerous is their letter talking about expanding into bigger markets. Omaha? You nuts?

[Happy]

Re: Notre Dame to Big 10?

Grassley and Harkin rarely agree on anything, but looking out for Iowa's financial interests in the Big 10 is evidently one. How humerous is their letter talking about expanding into bigger markets. Omaha? You nuts?

aren't they more worried about Iowa State being left as a mid-major than Iowa and the Big Ten.

[Priceless]

Re: Notre Dame to Big 10?

Grassley and Harkin rarely agree on anything, but looking out for Iowa's financial interests in the Big 10 is evidently one.

Well, that is their job.

[bigmrg74]

Re: Notre Dame to Big 10?

aren't they more worried about Iowa State being left as a mid-major than Iowa and the Big Ten.

My guess is that they crunched the numbers, and figured that it wasn't worth the votes they would get if they could somehow shoehorn the Cyclones into the Big Ten via political wrangling.

[Old Pio]

Re: Notre Dame to Big 10?

Well, that is their job.

No it's not. There will be no federal legislation proposed or passed on the issue of Big Ten expansion. But it will give these two clowns the chance to bloviate.

[Priceless]

Re: Notre Dame to Big 10?

No it's not. There will be no federal legislation proposed or passed on the issue of Big Ten expansion. But it will give these two clowns the chance to bloviate.

Their job is to fight for the interests of their constituents. The University of Iowa (and their students, faculty, alumni and supporters) are part of that constituency.

[Old Pio]

Re: Notre Dame to Big 10?

Their job is to fight for the interests of their constituents. The University of Iowa (and their students, faculty, alumni and supporters) are part of that constituency.

No it's not. Under your definition, everything is a federal matter. Like George Will says: we get ourselves into trouble by assuming every good idea needs to be a federal program and every bad idea needs to be a federal law.

The vast majority of the funding for state schools comes from state taxpayers and those funds, thankfully, are beyond the reach of self promoting, blowhard federal politicians.

"Fight for the interests of their constituents" is an open invitation to even more nonsense from Washington, which evidently meets with your approval. And who says that anyway, Henry Waxman? Their job is to offer, debate and vote on relevant federal legislation. "Fighting for the interests of their constituents" sounds more like the job description of a union goon than a United States senator.

And since, to my knowledge, the senators from Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania have been silent on this subject, are we to conclude that they've been derelict in their responsibilities?

The addition of a new school to a college athletic conference is hardly the business of the Senate, otherwise we'd have hearings on UNO and BSU coming in to the WCHA.

[Priceless]

Re: Notre Dame to Big 10?

And since, to my knowledge, the senators from Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania have been silent on this subject, are we to conclude that they've been derelict in their responsibilities?

The addition of a new school to a college athletic conference is hardly the business of the Senate, otherwise we'd have hearings on UNO and BSU coming in to the WCHA.

No, they just don't have the same concerns. If the BTN tries to play hardball with Comcast, then you can expect the senators from PA to get interested (especially Magic Bullet Boy). I said all this conference shuffling would get the attention of Congress, and it has.

And you trying to equate UNO and BSU joining a hockey conference to Nebraska joining the Big 10 is laughable. On the dollar level they're not even in the same universe.

[Old Pio]

Re: Notre Dame to Big 10?

No, they just don't have the same concerns. If the BTN tries to play hardball with Comcast, then you can expect the senators from PA to get interested (especially Magic Bullet Boy). I said all this conference shuffling would get the attention of Congress, and it has.

And you trying to equate UNO and BSU joining a hockey conference to Nebraska joining the Big 10 is laughable. On the dollar level they're not even in the same universe.

If you want to identify yourself with a couple of cheap posturing politicians that's your business. While you're standing up for that liar Harkin, maybe he can regale us with some fairytales about his combat experience in 'Nam. Or we can relive this highlight:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yshnh...eature=related

As Bugs Bunny would say: "what a maroon."

Congress has no business or interest in the financial arrangements of the Big Ten or any other conference. Harkin & Grassley do not equal "congress" except in your mind.

Maybe the hockey example is "laughable," but at least now we have the "Priceless Principle," it all depends on how much money is involved, not any legitimate legislative concern. Glad you explained it to us.

[Priceless]

Re: Notre Dame to Big 10?

If you want to identify yourself with a couple of cheap posturing politicians that's your business. While you're standing up for that liar Harkin, maybe he can regale us with some fairytales about his combat experience in 'Nam. Or we can relive this highlight:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yshnh...eature=related

As Bugs Bunny would say: "what a maroon."

Congress has no business or interest in the financial arrangements of the Big Ten or any other conference. Harkin & Grassley do not equal "congress" except in your mind.

Maybe the hockey example is "laughable," but at least now we have the "Priceless Principle," it all depends on how much money is involved, not any legitimate legislative concern. Glad you explained it to us.

It's news to you that the amount of money is what matters? That explains a lot...

[Old Pio]

Re: Notre Dame to Big 10?

It's news to you that the amount of money is what matters? That explains a lot...

What it may explain is that I don't belong to the Robert Byrd school of governance. You, evidently, are a charter member. That too many in our congress are motivated soley or principally by a desire to pick the pockets of taxpayers in 49 other states doesn't make it right. And once you've finished with your clever rhetoric, perhaps you can explain to us what legitimate interest the federal congress has in Big Ten expansion. And what legislation may be offered to ameliorate the situation.

[boot_walt_kyle]

Re: Notre Dame to Big 10?

Notre Dame, more like Notre Lame. I hope those childloving catholics stay out of the Big 10

[Priceless]

Re: Notre Dame to Big 10?

What it may explain is that I don't belong to the Robert Byrd school of governance. You, evidently, are a charter member. That too many in our congress are motivated soley or principally by a desire to pick the pockets of taxpayers in 49 other states doesn't make it right. And once you've finished with your clever rhetoric, perhaps you can explain to us what legitimate interest the federal congress has in Big Ten expansion. And what legislation may be offered to ameliorate the situation.

What you or I believe isn't relevant to the discussion. Congress is going to get involved.

I realize that only people from West Virginia like pork and the good people of Arizona would never accept a dime of earmark money.

Please note that I never said Congress had a "legitimate interest" in Big ? expansion. That's hard to define, and is different for everyone. Did Congress have a "legitimate interest" in which games were on the NFL Network? Steroids in baseball? A football championship? They don't need - and have never needed - a "legitimate interest" to get involved. If there is money at stake, they will find a reason to get involved.

Rant all you want. Write a letter to your local newspaper expressing your outrage. Call your Congress-critter and complain. But don't expect to change anything.

[Old Pio]

Re: Notre Dame to Big 10?

What you or I believe isn't relevant to the discussion. Congress is going to get involved.

I realize that only people from West Virginia like pork and the good people of Arizona would never accept a dime of earmark money.

Please note that I never said Congress had a "legitimate interest" in Big ? expansion. That's hard to define, and is different for everyone. Did Congress have a "legitimate interest" in which games were on the NFL Network? Steroids in baseball? A football championship? They don't need - and have never needed - a "legitimate interest" to get involved. If there is money at stake, they will find a reason to get involved.

Rant all you want. Write a letter to your local newspaper expressing your outrage. Call your Congress-critter and complain. But don't expect to change anything.

So you concede congress has no legitimate concerns here and there will be no legislation offered, debated or passed. I'm not ranting, I'm just wondering how it is you've come to elevate cynicism to a governing principle. Besides, congressional "involvement" rarely results in anything positive. However, that old crook Nixon got the NFL blackouts lifted by reminding Pete Rozelle that as president he controlled numerous important government agencies (like the IRS). Now that's involvement.

I'm not a native Arizonan, so say whatever you want about the state, but understand those insults don't strengthen your arguments, quite the opposite, in fact. Because anyone who compares John McCain with the dead Klan leader in terms of efficacy for getting federal goodies for his state is drinking deeply from the Koolaid and exposing his own biases. It's a free country of course, you're free to step on your johnson whenever you chose. Besides, Arizonans have far more to worry about now that Obama has announced his intention to declare war against us.

I ask again, you say congress is going to get involved, how? Hearings? What? Certainly you aren't suggesting that Harkin and Grassley's self serving whining constitutes congressional involvement. You may be right, some subcommittee somewhere may hold hearings designed for C-Span. So what? I'm old enough to remember opponants of the House Committee on Un-American Activities (among other things) used to complain that the committee never proposed any legislation, that it was just a forum attacking "innocent" Americans. And as such had no legitimacy. What would be the legitimacy of your congressional hearings?

I say Big Ten expansion is none of congress' business. Notwithstanding your predictions of what our leaders intend to do here, for the second time I ask: what's your position? Stop the weasel words and just tell us: does congress have a legitmate interest here? And what is the basis for your opinion? And what are they going to do about it?

[4four4]

Re: Notre Dame to Big 10?

I love government please give us more.