(01-29-2016 04:00 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 11:52 AM)Dasville Wrote:  Boren always mentions opportunities missed when speaking about the Big12. He mentions UofL frequently. The programs closest to UofL commitment, not yet in the P5 are: UConn, Houston, Cincy, and BYU. In that order. IMO.

How can UConn. be ahead of many other schools that have been playing football a lot longer than them? They are still behind on football, and there seems to be no fan support in other sports outside of basketball. It would be a big money drain on the Big 12 in inviting UConn. who is not even ready. Boren is setting up the Big 12 to fail by adding BYU and UConn.

UConn has pretty good basketball programs in both men and women and their academics are not to shabby, which carries a lot of weight with Boren.

(01-29-2016 10:20 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Sorry, neither BYU nor UCONN ill be invited to the Big 12. The expansion is east schools, and not an outlier like UConn.

East Carolina, Cincinnati, Memphis and UCF would be the first 4.

East Carolina is not on the Big 12 radar.

(01-29-2016 09:07 PM)KUGR Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 07:10 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  Please quote Boren as having said BYU as a candidate.

Boren has not mentioned any candidates by name in public. That said, his metrics and examples make it obvious.

Boren's metrics in order of importance:

1. Fan base size. Which team not in a P5 conference is, by a longshot, the leader here?

2. Overall athletic department success and spending. Look at BYU again.

3. Academics. USNWR rate BYU the highest of all the candidates. Granted, there are several fine academic institutions in that list.......such as Houston and UConn, as well. This was a lesser metric, however, and BYU does very well. This metric completely eliminates Boise and Memphis.

And then there was the examples he was giving yesterday to the media. The catholic church comparison and Notre Dame which is what would make ND attractive. Which school available most closely resembles ND in this regard? None of the available candidates come close......except possibly BYU. He also bashed the idea of big markets unless a school in a big market had a "strong presence" in that market. That puts Houston on shaky ground.

Media members who attended yesterday's press conference came away with the same impression and it was quite obvious. John Shinn even tweeted it out.

He also mentioned geography. A month ago the Tulsa writer said OU favored Cincinnati and Houston. Everybody is reading their own preferences into his words.

As far as academics, BYU is a bit of an odd bird. They don't quite fit. And as far as the metrics college presidents use (not USNWR), BYU ranks lower than all but Memphis. It doesn't have the research the others do. The no-Sunday play and the priorities of the school make it less of a "fit."

(01-29-2016 11:15 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  Kudos to your dedication, but you're speculating as to if Boren was referring to BYU. BYU also has its own ESPN contract which also could present a problem to a network or even joining the b12. I'd say all together there are easier candidates to access that don't present the usual problems with BYU joining. If I were in charge Memphis and Cincinnati and call it a day, two new markets, proximital to wvu, and they both have their inherent advantages.

I don't think there is very much speculation on the part. When he says fan base size and athletic department success are the two main criteria they will weigh and when he goes into detail talking about "market presence" nationally and starts using examples like Notre Dame's tie-in with catholics who do you think he's referring to?

OU's beat writer for the Norman Transcript and AP Top 25 voter, John Shinn, felt it was pretty obvious yesterday: https://twitter.com/john_shinn/status/69...6607450112

Hey, what do I know? When he talked about large fan bases, athletic department success, national following, and academics it was all secret code for Memphis, right? You know, since absolutely NONE of those could possibly describe Memphis....let alone all 4

Also, there really is nothing of concern with BYU's ESPN contract. That goes away the minute BYU joins a conference. BYU has a lot more foresight when they signed the deal then you think. LOL.

(01-30-2016 01:50 AM)KUGR Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 11:15 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  Kudos to your dedication, but you're speculating as to if Boren was referring to BYU. BYU also has its own ESPN contract which also could present a problem to a network or even joining the b12. I'd say all together there are easier candidates to access that don't present the usual problems with BYU joining. If I were in charge Memphis and Cincinnati and call it a day, two new markets, proximital to wvu, and they both have their inherent advantages.

I don't think there is very much speculation on the part. When he says fan base size and athletic department success are the two main criteria they will weigh and when he goes into detail talking about "market presence" nationally and starts using examples like Notre Dame's tie-in with catholics who do you think he's referring to?

OU's beat writer for the Norman Transcript and AP Top 25 voter, John Shinn, felt it was pretty obvious yesterday: https://twitter.com/john_shinn/status/69...6607450112

Hey, what do I know? When he talked about large fan bases, athletic department success, national following, and academics it was all secret code for Memphis, right? You know, since absolutely NONE of those coudl describe Memphis

Also, there really is nothing of concern with BYU's ESPN contract. That goes away the minute BYU joins a conference. BYU has a lot more foresight when they signed the deal then you think. LOL.

Do you know what a statement without any evidence is called? What I said, was purely subjective. You understand I'm not David Boren nor Bob Bowlsby right? Anyhow, all the best.

(01-30-2016 12:09 AM)bullet Wrote:  He also mentioned geography. A month ago the Tulsa writer said OU favored Cincinnati and Houston. Everybody is reading their own preferences into his words.

As far as academics, BYU is a bit of an odd bird. They don't quite fit. And as far as the metrics college presidents use (not USNWR), BYU ranks lower than all but Memphis. It doesn't have the research the others do. The no-Sunday play and the priorities of the school make it less of a "fit."

He did mention geography a while back when asked specifically about it. He also said it may be a factor "to an extent"......and listed below several other factors he said were more critical. Yesterday he mentioned nothing of it.

As far as academics, BYU's focus is in undergraduate areas.....and not research and graduate programs. It has a different focus. BYU's a very fine institution for what it does. Hence, the reason many rankings, including USNWR, rate it so highly. BYU is a very fine academic institution and university presidents know this. It's not based off BYU's high USNWR ranking or any other high ranking. You can argue the point all you want, but University presidents would hold BYU in high regard on this point. Memphis and Boise are non-starters in this regard.

Sunday play is an issue. I guess it will be how persuasive Boren can be. Can he convince other B12 presidents that Sunday play is a bigger issue than fan base size, athletics, academics, and so on than whether or not a handful of minor sports move their championship events one day? I have to agree it's an issue.....and I'm not sure that Boren will be successful doing so. There is also a general anti-mormon sentiment among a few people. I'd hope that University presidents would be smart enough to look past an such unfounded bias.

I still think there are a lot of hurdles for BYU to be invited to the B12. It's by no means a guarantee. Just because Boren would vote for them doesn't mean he can get BYU in the conference. I do think it's a positive, however, that Boren sees the strength BYU has. BYU is already P5 ready in terms of athletics. It's a stretch to say any other candidate is.

(01-29-2016 05:11 PM)KUGR Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 04:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 03:51 PM)KUGR Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 08:53 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  No he wasn't talking about BYU.
UConn has more broad market appeal than BYU. Especially, UConn basketball which would be a great product for the B12 Network.

Leave it to a bitter, scorned MWC fan to think Boren was really talking about Connecticut when he used an example of Notre Dame and their broad appeal by being connected to the Catholic church.

Leave it to a BYU fan to think Boren was really talking about BYU when he used an example of ND, since B12 officials have said several times that if they expand, they will likely go east, to help WVU, b/c they don't want to create another island, and b/c they don't want to add another time zone.

I guess he was referencing Memphis then? LOLOLOLOL. Never once has a B12 official said they were "going to go east". That's speculation on the part of media, for the most part. The problem is, as Boren pointed indirectly pointed out, when you look east the pickings get slim.

The Notre Dame comparison was to BYU. I'm not trying to mean here. I'm not trying to hurt anyone's feelings. The first thing he also mentions is fan base size. No. 1 priority.

Simply put 2 and 2 together. Memphis does not apply to any of these conditions. And Memphis academics are god awful.

I never mentioned Memphis.

Oh, how did that brawl you started work out for you guys?

(01-30-2016 02:04 AM)KUGR Wrote:  

(01-30-2016 12:09 AM)bullet Wrote:  He also mentioned geography. A month ago the Tulsa writer said OU favored Cincinnati and Houston. Everybody is reading their own preferences into his words.

As far as academics, BYU is a bit of an odd bird. They don't quite fit. And as far as the metrics college presidents use (not USNWR), BYU ranks lower than all but Memphis. It doesn't have the research the others do. The no-Sunday play and the priorities of the school make it less of a "fit."

He did mention geography a while back when asked specifically about it. He also said it may be a factor "to an extent"......and listed below several other factors he said were more critical. Yesterday he mentioned nothing of it.

As far as academics, BYU's focus is in undergraduate areas.....and not research and graduate programs. It has a different focus. BYU's a very fine institution for what it does. Hence, the reason many rankings, including USNWR, rate it so highly. BYU is a very fine academic institution and university presidents know this. It's not based off BYU's high USNWR ranking or any other high ranking. You can argue the point all you want, but University presidents would hold BYU in high regard on this point. Memphis and Boise are non-starters in this regard.

Sunday play is an issue. I guess it will be how persuasive Boren can be. Can he convince other B12 presidents that Sunday play is a bigger issue than fan base size, athletics, academics, and so on than whether or not a handful of minor sports move their championship events one day? I have to agree it's an issue.....and I'm not sure that Boren will be successful doing so. There is also a general anti-mormon sentiment among a few people. I'd hope that University presidents would be smart enough to look past an such unfounded bias.

I still think there are a lot of hurdles for BYU to be invited to the B12. It's by no means a guarantee. Just because Boren would vote for them doesn't mean he can get BYU in the conference. I do think it's a positive, however, that Boren sees the strength BYU has. BYU is already P5 ready in terms of athletics. It's a stretch to say any other candidate is.

Not a stretch to say Cincinnati is P5 worthy. We were P5 a few years ago and won consistently in football and basketball. Byu has more support no doubt; however, Cincinnati's support may not rival the largest programs, but it rivals the majority of other p5 teams.

(01-29-2016 04:07 AM)KUGR Wrote:  Very telling quote by Boren:

For once, Boren is correct: "Brand value" is the ultimate measuring rod for expansion. But, of the available schools, BYU and Boise clearly have the best football brand value.

Hate to admit it, but it's true.

(01-29-2016 09:07 PM)KUGR Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 07:10 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  Please quote Boren as having said BYU as a candidate.

Boren has not mentioned any candidates by name in public. That said, his metrics and examples make it obvious.

Boren's metrics in order of importance:

1. Fan base size. Which team not in a P5 conference is, by a longshot, the leader here?

2. Overall athletic department success and spending. Look at BYU again.

I love to jump in and smash the arguments of fans trying to tout their school as a better P5 candidate than my USF, but in this case I cannot disagree: By any measure of brand value, BYU is still clearly the #1 non-P5 school out there. Boise is next.

(01-30-2016 02:04 AM)KUGR Wrote:  

(01-30-2016 12:09 AM)bullet Wrote:  He also mentioned geography. A month ago the Tulsa writer said OU favored Cincinnati and Houston. Everybody is reading their own preferences into his words.

As far as academics, BYU is a bit of an odd bird. They don't quite fit. And as far as the metrics college presidents use (not USNWR), BYU ranks lower than all but Memphis. It doesn't have the research the others do. The no-Sunday play and the priorities of the school make it less of a "fit."

He did mention geography a while back when asked specifically about it. He also said it may be a factor "to an extent"......and listed below several other factors he said were more critical. Yesterday he mentioned nothing of it.

As far as academics, BYU's focus is in undergraduate areas.....and not research and graduate programs. It has a different focus. BYU's a very fine institution for what it does. Hence, the reason many rankings, including USNWR, rate it so highly. BYU is a very fine academic institution and university presidents know this. It's not based off BYU's high USNWR ranking or any other high ranking. You can argue the point all you want, but University presidents would hold BYU in high regard on this point. Memphis and Boise are non-starters in this regard.

Sunday play is an issue. I guess it will be how persuasive Boren can be. Can he convince other B12 presidents that Sunday play is a bigger issue than fan base size, athletics, academics, and so on than whether or not a handful of minor sports move their championship events one day? I have to agree it's an issue.....and I'm not sure that Boren will be successful doing so. There is also a general anti-mormon sentiment among a few people. I'd hope that University presidents would be smart enough to look past an such unfounded bias.

I still think there are a lot of hurdles for BYU to be invited to the B12. It's by no means a guarantee. Just because Boren would vote for them doesn't mean he can get BYU in the conference. I do think it's a positive, however, that Boren sees the strength BYU has. BYU is already P5 ready in terms of athletics. It's a stretch to say any other candidate is.

He talked about "fit," not quality. As I said BYU is not quite a fit (but then TCU wasn't really either). Everything I have heard indicates they want to stay in the eastern time zone and don't want to add more mileage for WVU. I think you are doing a lot of wishful thinking.

Now if I were a president, it would take about 5 seconds to pick BYU as #11. It wouldn't be close. But I just don't believe they are thinking the same way.

(01-29-2016 11:15 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 09:10 PM)KUGR Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 07:08 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  If the goal, is as Boren says for a network, the western partners don't make sense. Byutv creates another problem a la Texas.

BYU would drop BYUtv (as far as sports broadcasting) to get into the B12. BYUtv could actually help with broadcasting of a B12 network. BYU's AD has already tweeted out this will not be a hindrance to any B12 invite......and, in fact, may be advantageous.

Kudos to your dedication, but you're speculating as to if Boren was referring to BYU. BYU also has its own ESPN contract which also could present a problem to a network or even joining the b12. I'd say all together there are easier candidates to access that don't present the usual problems with BYU joining. If I were in charge Memphis and Cincinnati and call it a day, two new markets, proximital to wvu, and they both have their inherent advantages.

I do not think the Big 12 is expanding, but if they did BYU would be the top choice for a number of reasons

the BYU ESPN contract is an easy fix ESPN and BYU just end it

what is MUCH harder for ESPN is the contract with the AAC because ESPN is not going to get away with being a part of the Big 12 first tier media deal and paying teams to leave the AAC while at the same time trying to reduce or even break the AAC TV deal

so what that means for ESPN is they will be paying about $3 million more for two AAC teams if they are added to the Big 12 Vs what it would normally cost because ESPN WILL be continuing to pay that AAC contract in full even with the AAC having 10 teams and with the rules chances the AAC is not going to need to expand by two they can still have a CCG with 10 teams

there is also the fact that ESPN licenses 13 to 15 AAC football games per year to CBS and CBS has always played "hard ball" in conference expansion IE paying ZERO extra money to the SEC for A&M and MU and CBS is not going to be happy with the quality of games they have to choose from being reduced with AAC teams leaving

so there is a chance that CBS either ask for a reduction in money they pay ESPN for those games or CBS tries to pull out all together

so ESPN is looking at a situation where they go from paying $3 million a year for two AAC teams and they get money from CBS for a slate of games to ESPN paying $3 million per year to the AAC (for two teams no longer in the AAC), about half of what it cost to add two teams to the Big 12 ($20 million Fox paying the other half another $20 million) and ESPN shares that content with Fox and CBS probably ask for money back or pulls out of their licensing deal

or they simply ask BYU if they want to cancel their deal and go to the Big 12 if offered

Got to admit this made me laugh.....
No program presently in a P5 is jumping to The Big 12.
The Big 12 is now calling plays from The Big East playbook.
Refuse to expand with worthy teams until it's too late...
CJ

(01-29-2016 08:03 AM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  I wonder would Va Tech be interested in the Big 12 if the BYU scenario didn't work out?

(01-30-2016 02:04 AM)KUGR Wrote:  

(01-30-2016 12:09 AM)bullet Wrote:  He also mentioned geography. A month ago the Tulsa writer said OU favored Cincinnati and Houston. Everybody is reading their own preferences into his words.

As far as academics, BYU is a bit of an odd bird. They don't quite fit. And as far as the metrics college presidents use (not USNWR), BYU ranks lower than all but Memphis. It doesn't have the research the others do. The no-Sunday play and the priorities of the school make it less of a "fit."

He did mention geography a while back when asked specifically about it. He also said it may be a factor "to an extent"......and listed below several other factors he said were more critical. Yesterday he mentioned nothing of it.

As far as academics, BYU's focus is in undergraduate areas.....and not research and graduate programs. It has a different focus. BYU's a very fine institution for what it does. Hence, the reason many rankings, including USNWR, rate it so highly. BYU is a very fine academic institution and university presidents know this. It's not based off BYU's high USNWR ranking or any other high ranking. You can argue the point all you want, but University presidents would hold BYU in high regard on this point. Memphis and Boise are non-starters in this regard.

Sunday play is an issue. I guess it will be how persuasive Boren can be. Can he convince other B12 presidents that Sunday play is a bigger issue than fan base size, athletics, academics, and so on than whether or not a handful of minor sports move their championship events one day? I have to agree it's an issue.....and I'm not sure that Boren will be successful doing so. There is also a general anti-mormon sentiment among a few people. I'd hope that University presidents would be smart enough to look past an such unfounded bias.

I still think there are a lot of hurdles for BYU to be invited to the B12. It's by no means a guarantee. Just because Boren would vote for them doesn't mean he can get BYU in the conference. I do think it's a positive, however, that Boren sees the strength BYU has. BYU is already P5 ready in terms of athletics. It's a stretch to say any other candidate is.

Bullet, Chuck Nineas the Big12 Commissioner when BYU was being considered, recently said that the NO Sunday play was not an issue. I believe that is an internet myth.

(01-29-2016 04:31 PM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 11:52 AM)Dasville Wrote:  Boren always mentions opportunities missed when speaking about the Big12. He mentions UofL frequently. The programs closest to UofL commitment, not yet in the P5 are: UConn, Houston, Cincy, and BYU. In that order. IMO.

You don't think Memphis is committed now? The days of neglecting football for the sake of basketball are long gone. Fuente (19 wins over the last 2 years) was replaced by the 3rd-highest paid assistant in Division 1, top-notch facilties are being built and the goal of becoming one of the nation's premiere urban research universities is on track (Alabama was just passed in research dollars).

Avenger, SMU also has academics, Stadium facilities, endowment, market etc. and we have no chance of getting an invite to the Big12 and neither does Memphis. Sorry, but it is what it is.

(01-30-2016 06:03 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  Avenger, SMU also has academics, Stadium facilities, endowment, market etc. and we have no chance of getting an invite to the Big12 and neither does Memphis. Sorry, but it is what it is.

If it's all the same to you, I will wait for the final outcome.

BYU and UNLV looking more and more attractive in a south division with the Texas schools.

(01-30-2016 12:00 PM)bullet Wrote:  He talked about "fit," not quality.

He defined specifically what "fit" meant. He then went on to describe how the process has gone and how it would go. They would look at schools and judge them by metrics....not by "I like so and so school". Put personal biases aside and just look at the metrics and there is no better candidate than BYU available.

(01-30-2016 12:00 PM)bullet Wrote:  As I said BYU is not quite a fit (but then TCU wasn't really either).
Everything I have heard indicates they want to stay in the eastern time zone and don't want to add more mileage for WVU. I think you are doing a lot of wishful thinking.

Really. No one is a fit.....not even WVU due to geography. But, I get the point you are saying. I'd hope University presidents are smart enough to look past such phony biases.

Also, how can you "hear" anything worth much when the schools themselves have no unison voice on the issue......much less the specific candidates??? Going east makes sense until you look what's out there. It's not much. As for WVU travel, you forget that WVU's president is a former BYU law school dean. He would have no problem voting BYU into the conference I would not think. If WVU is on board I doubt anyone else is worried about travel between BYU and WVU.

Like I said, there are a lot of issues that must be overcome. First, Boren needs to get at least 8 on board with expansion......and then 8 on board to vote for BYU. It may not happen. Boren was clear on his metrics and preferences, though. That's a positive.

(01-30-2016 05:50 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(01-30-2016 02:04 AM)KUGR Wrote:  

(01-30-2016 12:09 AM)bullet Wrote:  He also mentioned geography. A month ago the Tulsa writer said OU favored Cincinnati and Houston. Everybody is reading their own preferences into his words.

As far as academics, BYU is a bit of an odd bird. They don't quite fit. And as far as the metrics college presidents use (not USNWR), BYU ranks lower than all but Memphis. It doesn't have the research the others do. The no-Sunday play and the priorities of the school make it less of a "fit."

He did mention geography a while back when asked specifically about it. He also said it may be a factor "to an extent"......and listed below several other factors he said were more critical. Yesterday he mentioned nothing of it.

As far as academics, BYU's focus is in undergraduate areas.....and not research and graduate programs. It has a different focus. BYU's a very fine institution for what it does. Hence, the reason many rankings, including USNWR, rate it so highly. BYU is a very fine academic institution and university presidents know this. It's not based off BYU's high USNWR ranking or any other high ranking. You can argue the point all you want, but University presidents would hold BYU in high regard on this point. Memphis and Boise are non-starters in this regard.

Sunday play is an issue. I guess it will be how persuasive Boren can be. Can he convince other B12 presidents that Sunday play is a bigger issue than fan base size, athletics, academics, and so on than whether or not a handful of minor sports move their championship events one day? I have to agree it's an issue.....and I'm not sure that Boren will be successful doing so. There is also a general anti-mormon sentiment among a few people. I'd hope that University presidents would be smart enough to look past an such unfounded bias.

I still think there are a lot of hurdles for BYU to be invited to the B12. It's by no means a guarantee. Just because Boren would vote for them doesn't mean he can get BYU in the conference. I do think it's a positive, however, that Boren sees the strength BYU has. BYU is already P5 ready in terms of athletics. It's a stretch to say any other candidate is.

Bullet, Chuck Nineas the Big12 Commissioner when BYU was being considered, recently said that the NO Sunday play was not an issue. I believe that is an internet myth.

No Sunday play is a hassle. Its not a disqualifier. Its just one more thing that makes them more difficult and less of a "fit." Track and Field, Tennis, baseball, softball and any other sport using Sunday has to adjust its schedule. And its not just no Sunday. There is an issue with travel, so you have to be done before a certain time on Saturday. Its workable, but its a pain.

(01-30-2016 10:02 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-30-2016 05:50 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(01-30-2016 02:04 AM)KUGR Wrote:  

(01-30-2016 12:09 AM)bullet Wrote:  He also mentioned geography. A month ago the Tulsa writer said OU favored Cincinnati and Houston. Everybody is reading their own preferences into his words.

As far as academics, BYU is a bit of an odd bird. They don't quite fit. And as far as the metrics college presidents use (not USNWR), BYU ranks lower than all but Memphis. It doesn't have the research the others do. The no-Sunday play and the priorities of the school make it less of a "fit."

He did mention geography a while back when asked specifically about it. He also said it may be a factor "to an extent"......and listed below several other factors he said were more critical. Yesterday he mentioned nothing of it.

As far as academics, BYU's focus is in undergraduate areas.....and not research and graduate programs. It has a different focus. BYU's a very fine institution for what it does. Hence, the reason many rankings, including USNWR, rate it so highly. BYU is a very fine academic institution and university presidents know this. It's not based off BYU's high USNWR ranking or any other high ranking. You can argue the point all you want, but University presidents would hold BYU in high regard on this point. Memphis and Boise are non-starters in this regard.

Sunday play is an issue. I guess it will be how persuasive Boren can be. Can he convince other B12 presidents that Sunday play is a bigger issue than fan base size, athletics, academics, and so on than whether or not a handful of minor sports move their championship events one day? I have to agree it's an issue.....and I'm not sure that Boren will be successful doing so. There is also a general anti-mormon sentiment among a few people. I'd hope that University presidents would be smart enough to look past an such unfounded bias.

I still think there are a lot of hurdles for BYU to be invited to the B12. It's by no means a guarantee. Just because Boren would vote for them doesn't mean he can get BYU in the conference. I do think it's a positive, however, that Boren sees the strength BYU has. BYU is already P5 ready in terms of athletics. It's a stretch to say any other candidate is.

Bullet, Chuck Nineas the Big12 Commissioner when BYU was being considered, recently said that the NO Sunday play was not an issue. I believe that is an internet myth.

No Sunday play is a hassle. Its not a disqualifier. Its just one more thing that makes them more difficult and less of a "fit." Track and Field, Tennis, baseball, softball and any other sport using Sunday has to adjust its schedule. And its not just no Sunday. There is an issue with travel, so you have to be done before a certain time on Saturday. Its workable, but its a pain.

And that's partly why BYU was part of the WAC and MWC for 50 years: BYU felt (justified) like they were carrying their conference mates many years in football BUT the mountain state schools coming from states with a much higher LDS population by far than non-mountain states worked with them on their Sunday play issue. That's never talked about for some reason. BYU fans need to acknowledge that Wyoming, New Mexico, Colorado St, Utah etc understood the culture of BYU and were pretty helpful most of the time. Big 12 schools like Texas, OU and Kansas wouldn't have been so "understanding" and helpful to BYU's unique situation. cheers!