Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[usfgrad84]

Depends on where we want to end up. If the University's goal is to stay in a 2nd tier conference it is fine. If they want to get to the top level it is a different conversation. 

$20+ million dollar difference a year is a big deal  

 

[Bull-Hornz]

I hate adding to the OCS spark in threads but we had good numbers at RJ when the program had a consistently good product on the field. 

Only hardcore fans knew that USF was doing better this year and most of us were pleasantly surprised and thought CWT was going to be fired. Winning our bowl game might have help the upcoming season hype but I am sure losing to WK-WHO? will not help the casual fans enthusiasm. I know WKU was a good team and while I didn't like seeing the regression on O, I am hopeful that the O continues to grow since we have the same coaches in place.

The average fan and the media will react once we get back to slaying giants. Beating a recognized brands of football is much more important than any OCS at this point. We had our chances to beat Maryland and FSU and will need to beat P5 big names if we want to fill any stadium up again.

[TyBull]

Tramel: Academics Matter in Realignment

http://newsok.com/academics-matters-in-c...le/5473247

I wrote about conference realignment last week, and one thing I focused on was the Big Ten’s history of inviting new members only if they are in the American Association of Universities. You can read that post here.

Basically, I said that AAU membership long had been a goal of OU president David Boren, even before conference realignment became all the rage.

I received an email from a college professor who once worked at OU but now is at a university out of state. I met the guy a couple times. He had some really interesting things to say, so I thought I would share them with you. He requested anonymity.

“Just read your article on the Big 12 that mentioned AAU membership. Here's some background that may be useful to you. AAU membership and "Carnegie Classification" are the two best-known indications of elite academic status. There are 62 AAU members and 108 "Carnegie I" universities (all AAU members also are Carnegie I). Here's how the Power 5 conferences compare by those two criteria:

“Big 10: 14 members, 14 Carnegie I, 13 AAU
“PAC 10: 12 members, 12 Carnegie I, 8 AAU
“ACC: 15 members (including Notre Dame), 11 Carnegie I, 5 AAU
“SEC: 14 members, 11 Carnegie I, 4 AAU
“Big 12: 10 members, 4 Carnegie I, 3 AAU.

“The Big 12 is the only Power 5 conference with a majority of non-elite university members, which gives it an academic profile more similar to the various mid-major conferences.
“When Nebraska, Colorado, Missouri, and Texas A&M left the Big 12, that was an academic loss of 4 Carnegie I and 4 AAU members (although Nebraska subsequently lost its AAU status). In return, the Big 12 added West Virginia and TCU, neither of which is a Carnegie I institution. Of the current Big 12 members, Kansas State, OSU, TCU, West Virginia, Baylor and Texas Tech are unlikely to gain Carnegie I status in the next decade.
“In thinking about new Big 12 schools, Houston, Colorado State, South Florida, Central Florida, New Mexico and Connecticut all are Carnegie I universities. In particular, Colorado State, South Florida, Central Florida and UConn are on growth curves that conceivably could lead to AAU membership at some point.

“In contrast, BYU, SMU, Memphis and Boise State are not Carnegie I and are unlikely to become such.
“OU is unlikely to become an AAU member, as it would have to at least double its current annual research expenditures from nationally competitive grants and currently has no National Academy of Sciences members (most AAU members have at least 10 NAS members and many have significantly more — none has fewer than five NAS members). That kind of change would require at least a decade to accomplish before being considered for AAU (which then has further political barriers to admission).
“Hope this helps.”

It absolutely does help. It tells me several things.

The Big 12’s academic standing is worse than I thought. And that’s no small matter. That kind of stuff absolutely matters to decision-makers. The Big 12 went from 58 percent AAU membership to 30 percent AAU membership. I don’t claim to know the legitimacy of academic rankings. But I know they have standing within campuses. The Big 12 is not just the shakiest power conference on the football field. It’s the shakiest power conference in academia.
OU’s Big Ten hopes aren’t strong. I don’t see the Big Ten inviting a school that is not an AAU member. If it happens, great. And if the Big Ten were to relax its requirements, it would seem to do so only for Notre Dame.
Interesting about the “growth tracks” toward AAU membership. Who knew the Florida schools or Colorado State were held in such high regard. Or Houston U., for that matter.
My source didn’t mention Cincinnati. Probably an oversight. But for the record, Cincinnati is a Carnegie I school but is not in the AAU.
I’ll finish with this. Back when Nebraska and Colorado first left the Big 12, and before the moves of Missouri/Texas A&M to the SEC, Maryland/Rutgers to the Big Ten and Pitt/Louisville/Syracuse to the ACC, I chatted with OU athletic director Joe Castiglione, who like everyone else in Oklahoma, was clearly intrigued by the prospect of Louisville. Joe C. also mentioned Pitt. “The University of Pittsburgh is a terrific academic institution.”

OU couldn’t garner enough support for Louisville, so support for Pitt was beside the point.

And in the summer of 2010, when it appeared the Big 12 would fold and OU and OSU would head to a Pac-16, I talked to two people. One was a high-ranking university official. The other was a professor who lives in my neighborhood. Both were excited about the possibility of OU joining the Pac. Ecstatic might be too strong, but only because there was some regret about leaving behind old friends and really the only league the university ever had known. Moving to a league with Stanford, Cal-Berkeley and UCLA thrilled these two men.

Academic standing matters. I’m not saying it’s the paramount consideration in conference realignment. But it matters.

[Sellular1]

Just need all 5 Power conferences to go to 14 teams.

Pac12 adds 2 teams: Boise State, BYU

B12 adds 4 teams: USF, UCF, UConn, Cincy

Notre Dame can stay Indy and continue to do what they do

 

[Azmodi]

5 minutes ago, Sellular1 said:

Just need all 5 Power conferences to go to 14 teams.

Pac12 adds 2 teams: Boise State, BYU

B12 adds 4 teams: USF, UCF, UConn, Cincy

Notre Dame can stay Indy and continue to do what they do

 

That's nice wishful thinking but, neither Boise State or BYU will ever play a game in the PAC. BYU will be blocked by UTAH and any support they can garner while Boise states academics are just too low.

Edited January 18, 2016 by Azmodi

[Sellular1]

Just now, Azmodi said:

That's nice wishful thinking but, neither Boise State or BYU will never play a game in the PAC. BYU will be blocked by UTAH and any support they can garner while Boise states academics are just too low.

Sub them with Colorado State and Houston then, I dont care about the left coast....  Only point was hoping for continuity and seeing the B12 go to 14 teams like the SEC, ACC, and B1G

[Azmodi]

3 minutes ago, Sellular1 said:

Sub them with Colorado State and Houston then, I dont care about the left coast....  Only point was hoping for continuity and seeing the B12 go to 14 teams like the SEC, ACC, and B1G

Gotcha! Well, I do believe that Houston's only hope is the PAC so theirs that.

Edited January 18, 2016 by Azmodi

[ArmyBull]

“When Nebraska, Colorado, Missouri, and Texas A&M left the Big 12, that was an academic loss of 4 Carnegie I and 4 AAU members (although Nebraska subsequently lost its AAU status). In return, the Big 12 added West Virginia and TCU, neither of which is a Carnegie I institution. Of the current Big 12 members, Kansas State, OSU, TCU, West Virginia, Baylor and Texas Tech are unlikely to gain Carnegie I status in the next decade.
“In thinking about new Big 12 schools, Houston, Colorado State, South Florida, Central Florida, New Mexico and Connecticut all are Carnegie I universities. In particular, Colorado State, South Florida, Central Florida and UConn are on growth curves that conceivably could lead to AAU membership at some point.

 

For some reason, I thought we were light years ahead of UCF in academics and AAU eligibility progress.  

[Apis Bull]

14 hours ago, ArmyBull said:

“When Nebraska, Colorado, Missouri, and Texas A&M left the Big 12, that was an academic loss of 4 Carnegie I and 4 AAU members (although Nebraska subsequently lost its AAU status). In return, the Big 12 added West Virginia and TCU, neither of which is a Carnegie I institution. Of the current Big 12 members, Kansas State, OSU, TCU, West Virginia, Baylor and Texas Tech are unlikely to gain Carnegie I status in the next decade.
“In thinking about new Big 12 schools, Houston, Colorado State, South Florida, Central Florida, New Mexico and Connecticut all are Carnegie I universities. In particular, Colorado State, South Florida, Central Florida and UConn are on growth curves that conceivably could lead to AAU membership at some point.

 

For some reason, I thought we were light years ahead of UCF in academics and AAU eligibility progress.  

IIRC, we are ahead.  "Light years"?  I'm not sure.

[ArmyBull]

http://www.wvgazettemail.com/sports/20160118/mitch-vingle-wvu-should-support-borens-big-12-identity

Full read below.  Lots of great stuff.  It seems like some decisions will indeed be made in February.  I also believe that we are synonymous with UCF in this article.  

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

“We do not have at least 12 members,” Boren said. “We do not have a conference network and we do not have a championship game. I think all three of these disadvantages need to be addressed at the same time. Addressing only one without addressing all three will not be adequate to improve the strength of the conference.”

When reached on Monday, WVU president E. Gordon Gee was anything but shocked at the comments.

“I think [the remarks] are fairly consistent with the thinking in the Big 12,” he said. “It’s nothing new. I’m in favor of expansion. I think he’s expressing what we’ve been thinking.”

Those words are significant. And so is this from Gee, a member of the Big 12’s expansion committee: “I think the notion of going to 12 [schools] is most likely.”

“Some of these issues will be discussed and resolved in February,” Gee added. “It’s all part of a package.”

More significant yet. The league presidents and chancellors will meet Feb. 4-5. And both Boren and Gee are respected within that circle. Boren, especially, has much clout.

His idea is to add teams, fold Texas’ Longhorn Network and other third-tier properties into a Big 12 Network and stage a football championship.

“I think if we try to do it piecemeal, we’re just gonna kind of end up with just a Band-Aid on top,” Boren told the Tulsa World. “I think we need a comprehensive plan to strengthen the conference and give it equal status with the other Power 5 conferences.”

Boren said he was “for adding Louisville [when WVU and TCU were taken in]. I obviously did not prevail, and [the U of L has] now gone into another conference… They’d have been a good fit.”

Boren continued, saying he was “very frustrated” and even made a not-so-veiled threat of moving Oklahoma from the Big 12. (“I think there are always opportunities for Oklahoma,” he said.)

“I think if — if — we can get the Big 12 on the right track, if this comprehensive plan could be adopted, then I would rather stay in the Big 12,” Boren said. “I think that would be to our advantage. But it’s something that we really need to have happen.”

Perhaps some of the above chafes WVU followers. Boren could have been saying he favored Louisville over West Virginia.

That’s in the past though. Going forward it would be in WVU’s best interest to throw complete support to Boren _ as long as expansion moves eastward.

Let’s face it, membership in the Big 12 is tough on Mountaineer fans that want to see their team outside of home games. Adding Cincinnati would be a terrific help to Gee, athletic director Shane Lyons and WVU.

There are many other expansion candidates out there, but let’s examine a few. First, Houston sounds sexy these days, yet the Big 12 gains nothing by adding the Cougars. The league already owns Texas. BYU and Salt Lake City is over 1,000 miles just from Texas. Colorado State is, well, Colorado State.

And then there are the schools located more toward WVU. The last thing the Big 12 needs is more schools in the Southwest or in the Rocky Mountains. If Boren and the others in the league truly want to be more of a national conference, a la the Big Ten, they need to look at markets like New York (Connecticut) or Orlando (Central Florida). Memphis would be a nice fit geographically and would help WVU as well.

Yet let’s move to Boren’s other desire: a Big 12 network. If the league wants to start such a network it would have to do so in what one television insider called “the least cabled environment” among the conferences. The old Big East was wired with cities like Baltimore, Washington, New York, Philadelphia, etc. The Big 12 would be helped by moving into, say, New York via Connecticut. The Huskies, according to the insider, draw more television numbers, at least in basketball, than Rutgers for the Big Ten.

You might think it would be impossible to talk Texas into ditching the Longhorn Network. It just screams “stumbling block.” That, though, is not the case. The Longhorn Network has never worked. It’s lost money from Day 1. ESPN would give it back tomorrow. Those in the know say dissolution of that could be negotiated in a day. The Big 12 would simply cover the money Texas would earn within the Big 12 Network structure.

So the “comprehensive plan” Boren has proposed isn’t far-fetched at all. In fact, it could help not only the league but WVU. The Mountaineers could have travel partners. Their fans could get to more games. The Big 12 could become more of a national brand. And a Big 12 Network could be more wired to more homes.