Are you taking the time to write administration and politicians that these deals should be separate? I’m considering it, just not sure what I think would be a good deal besides opening PUF which is complicated.
uta Houston land purchase will be about 332 acres by 2017.
Keep in mind that there is enough land directly to the Southwest to add another 100+ acres. Look at the satelite images.
Now what about the other ut campuses?
utep is the closest in size with 366 acres. The other option that uta has is to have different locations for specific programs spread around the City of Houston. It is pretty common with the PAC12 Schools. I trust our leadership. The reason why our School is where it is at today is because of the vision that they have. I would have never imagined that we could even be close to where we are today. But they did it and ARE DOING IT with barely any PUF help. That is the core of this potential deal. For any doubters about our skepticism I would ask you why would the PUF be used to accomplish such purchase? If uta was so concerned about education and higher research they would HAVE GIVEN US THE MONEY.
Since our creation how many times has uta help us build or grow our institution?
Since we started how has uta TREATED US?
Why would they do it now?
What is their interest to do it?
Some bring up that we could be part of a research “team/project” don’t we already have such program?
Why did they recently oppose our Med School project? Could that be due to uta Houston Medical facilities maybe?
I am all for teaming up with the right partner. What makes me think for one second that they are the one?
1 Like
It should not be forgotten that UT showed nearly zero interest in expansion or Houston being included before the new ACC contract precluded itself from being poached. Directly after this happened is when all of the Houston to B12 talk began.
We need to stop zeroing in on the UT Houston campus as the sole reason for our inclusion. If that was the case we would have seen all of the push long before the ACC contract forced the issue.
No one believes that UT or any school for that matter is acting in some altruistic manner. All schools look after their own interests. That doesn’t mean that UT Houston is the sole impetus for all that has recently transpired. The ACC deal effectively removed all sense of maybe concerning the poaching of its members. This made it clear who the prime expansion candidates really were. The B12 has the choice of stability and the ability to gain back market share in its largest city—plus have several years of extra revenue for existing members with buy in clauses. Or it could lose Houston to the SEC and the P5 that ultimately takes UH.
I don’t think there is any way to stop a UT campus in Houston if UT decides they want one. They have the money and the political clout. Taint right, but its true.