(12-16-2015 12:17 AM)georgewebb Wrote: To the extent that any P5 conference already has a small private university, that is assuredly by historical accident, not by current design -- nor is it evidence of interest in adding another one.
Actually, I've been told many times that it is intentional, and for a legal reason.
Although nothing in this area has ever, to my knowledge, been litigated (and somebody please correct me if I am wrong), the prevailing legal opinion has been that if a conference has all public school members, then the conference itself could be considered a governmental entity subject to the due process clause of the14th Amendment, but if one member is private, then the conference is not. I don't know how good that theory is, and I have my doubts it would hold up, but it has been treated as a safe harbor.
That's why at least all of the big leagues have at least one private member. They don't want to have to met all the due process rules when they are splitting up the big bucks, and it is pretty clear that in many instances regarding finance and discipline they don't follow them. I recall some discussion about Northwestern leaving the Big-10 a number of years ago (before they turned football around) where this was a key sticking point. SEC has Vandy, Pac-12 has Stanford and USC, Big-10 has Northwestern (plus Rutgers is a public-private hybrid), XII has Baylor and TCU, ACC has BC, Duke, Miami, Syracuse, and Wake (plus Pitt is a public-private hybrid).
At the mid-major level, it's a bit of a different story. AAC has SMU, Tulane, and Tulsa, but Rice is now the only private school in CUSA, and MWC (since BYU left), MAC, and Sunbelt have none. Apparently, it's not as big an issue when the bucks aren't as big, or maybe they just can't find any suitable private mates. If there is any weight to be attached to this theory, it would make Rice more attractive to the MWC than to the AAC.
As for the interest of adding another, there has also been some discussion that leagues which split into divisions would be in a safer harbor with one private school in each division. Pac-10 supposedly considered this when they split the California schools between north and south rather than putting Colorado and Utah in the north. There has also been some discussion that this was a factor with Rutgers and the Big-10, although that was probably more about the NYC Metro market and I'm not sure how sketchy it would be to depend on a semi-private university for your private "cover." It was supposedly one reason for the SEC's one-time interest in Rice. ACC has multiple privates in both divisions, so this is obviously no big deal to them. The XII doesn't have divisions, so it's not now a factor. If they go to divisions, it will be interesting to see if they split Baylor and TCU. AAC did not follow this in assigning their divisions.
I don't think this would ever be a "King's X" factor, but I have certainly been told many times by knowledgeable persons that it is a real consideration.
