Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
Author Message
Frank the Tank Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,349
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 587
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #281
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(02-05-2020 09:52 AM)esayem Wrote:  I think there are certain advantages being associated with private schools. I don’t see that going away.

Absolutely! The Big Ten schools WANT the association with Northwestern.

By the same token, why is there an assumption that private schools would be less likely to participate in a pay for play environment? If anything, the Power Five private schools as a whole are among the wealthiest institutions in the nation. Taking Northwestern as an example, they could pay for its athletes with essentially a day’s worth of interest on its endowment. At the same time, they use their association with the Big Ten and its association with big-time athletics in its recruiting for academic students against the Ivy League and University of Chicago. Northwestern wants to maintain its association with the Big Ten as much as the Big Ten wants to keeps its association with them.

The association with big-time athletics is even more important for the schools just below the Northwestern/Duke academic tier, such as Wake Forest and Boston College. They’re competing for students against the likes of Emory, Boston University, Northeastern and Davidson, so their ACC membership is a significant selling tool.

I’ve always stated that this forum often overrates enrollment of non-flagship/non-top research public universities and underrates top rated private schools, particularly those directly located in key markets (e.g. Chicago, Boston, Miami, Nashville, etc.).

I don’t think anyone in a P5 conference is EVER going to unilaterally downgrade regardless of the rules. When push comes to shove, Northwestern will absolutely pay to play if necessary because it’s just as much about competing for top academic students against Harvard and the University of Chicago as it is about competing against Michigan and Ohio State for top football recruits. The people paying $80,000 per year for tuition and room and board at places like Duke, Northwestern and Vandy absolutely want that big-time athletic atmosphere to distinguish themselves from the Ivy League.
(This post was last modified: 02-05-2020 11:15 AM by Frank the Tank.)
02-05-2020 11:14 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RutgersGuy Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,017
Joined: Nov 2015
Reputation: 130
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #282
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(01-28-2020 05:50 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(01-27-2020 12:25 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  OSU’s academics aren’t really the issue (though never underestimate the academic snobbery of the presidents who do the actual voting. They want candidates that improve their academic association, not ones that are average)

Like ISU and the B1G, Their real issue is that they are the second school from a small state and simply don’t bring the revenue to cover the cost of their addition

And that’s not a knock against OSU since they have a very good athletic program, but as of the new reality of 60+ million, VERY few programs now make The List

Expansion grew into realignment. Football was replaced by total gross revenue.
If money is the only criteria for what ever we are calling this process today, how much longer before the SEC asks Vanderbilt or the ACC asks Wake Forest to leave? Those schools clearly don't pull in their share of revenue and they have no hope of doing so in the future. When do we start culling the herd?

Now that you mention it, I think Wake and Vandy would be great additions to the Big East in a scenario like that. Hell I know it'll never happen but would be a nice southern wing of that conference. if they wanted to go indy in FBS they could band together with UConn for a scheduling agreement.

And yes, this will never ever happen.
02-05-2020 10:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,831
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 247
I Root For: Carolina
Location:
Post: #283
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(02-05-2020 11:14 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(02-05-2020 09:52 AM)esayem Wrote:  I think there are certain advantages being associated with private schools. I don’t see that going away.

Absolutely! The Big Ten schools WANT the association with Northwestern.

By the same token, why is there an assumption that private schools would be less likely to participate in a pay for play environment? If anything, the Power Five private schools as a whole are among the wealthiest institutions in the nation. Taking Northwestern as an example, they could pay for its athletes with essentially a day’s worth of interest on its endowment. At the same time, they use their association with the Big Ten and its association with big-time athletics in its recruiting for academic students against the Ivy League and University of Chicago. Northwestern wants to maintain its association with the Big Ten as much as the Big Ten wants to keeps its association with them.

The association with big-time athletics is even more important for the schools just below the Northwestern/Duke academic tier, such as Wake Forest and Boston College. They’re competing for students against the likes of Emory, Boston University, Northeastern and Davidson, so their ACC membership is a significant selling tool.

I’ve always stated that this forum often overrates enrollment of non-flagship/non-top research public universities and underrates top rated private schools, particularly those directly located in key markets (e.g. Chicago, Boston, Miami, Nashville, etc.).

I don’t think anyone in a P5 conference is EVER going to unilaterally downgrade regardless of the rules. When push comes to shove, Northwestern will absolutely pay to play if necessary because it’s just as much about competing for top academic students against Harvard and the University of Chicago as it is about competing against Michigan and Ohio State for top football recruits. The people paying $80,000 per year for tuition and room and board at places like Duke, Northwestern and Vandy absolutely want that big-time athletic atmosphere to distinguish themselves from the Ivy League.

Before the BTN Northwestern had contemplated approaching the Ivy.
The ACC had developed an expansion scenario that targeted Northwestern and Vanderbilt.
Presidents talk. They are looking for institutional fit, not total gross revenue of their potential partners. What they are looking for is a chance for their athletic teams to compete against peers.
In the long run, the B1G my want to associate with Northwestern, but Northwestern may choose to associate with schools that look more like them.
02-06-2020 05:54 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RutgersGuy Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,017
Joined: Nov 2015
Reputation: 130
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #284
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
Either the SEC and B1G split the two big fish (OU & Texas) or they both stay in the XII. I don't think either league gets both of them. I also don't think Texas goes Indy and has to put it's other sports in a conference thats below their (perceived) standards. Texas wants all of it's sports in the big leagues.
02-06-2020 06:36 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,831
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 247
I Root For: Carolina
Location:
Post: #285
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(02-06-2020 06:36 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Either the SEC and B1G split the two big fish (OU & Texas) or they both stay in the XII. I don't think either league gets both of them. I also don't think Texas goes Indy and has to put it's other sports in a conference thats below their (perceived) standards. Texas wants all of it's sports in the big leagues.

If Texas leaves the Big 12 (or the Big 12 dissolves), the Longhorn's have only three realistic choices: the B1G, the ACC, or the ACC as a Notre Dame type partial.
02-06-2020 08:07 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
IWokeUpLikeThis Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,116
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 233
I Root For: NIU, Chicago St
Location: South Side
Post: #286
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(02-06-2020 05:54 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(02-05-2020 11:14 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(02-05-2020 09:52 AM)esayem Wrote:  I think there are certain advantages being associated with private schools. I don’t see that going away.

Absolutely! The Big Ten schools WANT the association with Northwestern.

By the same token, why is there an assumption that private schools would be less likely to participate in a pay for play environment? If anything, the Power Five private schools as a whole are among the wealthiest institutions in the nation. Taking Northwestern as an example, they could pay for its athletes with essentially a day’s worth of interest on its endowment. At the same time, they use their association with the Big Ten and its association with big-time athletics in its recruiting for academic students against the Ivy League and University of Chicago. Northwestern wants to maintain its association with the Big Ten as much as the Big Ten wants to keeps its association with them.

The association with big-time athletics is even more important for the schools just below the Northwestern/Duke academic tier, such as Wake Forest and Boston College. They’re competing for students against the likes of Emory, Boston University, Northeastern and Davidson, so their ACC membership is a significant selling tool.

I’ve always stated that this forum often overrates enrollment of non-flagship/non-top research public universities and underrates top rated private schools, particularly those directly located in key markets (e.g. Chicago, Boston, Miami, Nashville, etc.).

I don’t think anyone in a P5 conference is EVER going to unilaterally downgrade regardless of the rules. When push comes to shove, Northwestern will absolutely pay to play if necessary because it’s just as much about competing for top academic students against Harvard and the University of Chicago as it is about competing against Michigan and Ohio State for top football recruits. The people paying $80,000 per year for tuition and room and board at places like Duke, Northwestern and Vandy absolutely want that big-time athletic atmosphere to distinguish themselves from the Ivy League.

Before the BTN Northwestern had contemplated approaching the Ivy.
The ACC had developed an expansion scenario that targeted Northwestern and Vanderbilt.
Presidents talk. They are looking for institutional fit, not total gross revenue of their potential partners. What they are looking for is a chance for their athletic teams to compete against peers.
In the long run, the B1G my want to associate with Northwestern, but Northwestern may choose to associate with schools that look more like them.

Pre-1995. Northwestern won 3 B1G titles between 1995-BTN.
02-06-2020 10:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,349
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 587
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #287
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(02-06-2020 05:54 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(02-05-2020 11:14 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(02-05-2020 09:52 AM)esayem Wrote:  I think there are certain advantages being associated with private schools. I don’t see that going away.

Absolutely! The Big Ten schools WANT the association with Northwestern.

By the same token, why is there an assumption that private schools would be less likely to participate in a pay for play environment? If anything, the Power Five private schools as a whole are among the wealthiest institutions in the nation. Taking Northwestern as an example, they could pay for its athletes with essentially a day’s worth of interest on its endowment. At the same time, they use their association with the Big Ten and its association with big-time athletics in its recruiting for academic students against the Ivy League and University of Chicago. Northwestern wants to maintain its association with the Big Ten as much as the Big Ten wants to keeps its association with them.

The association with big-time athletics is even more important for the schools just below the Northwestern/Duke academic tier, such as Wake Forest and Boston College. They’re competing for students against the likes of Emory, Boston University, Northeastern and Davidson, so their ACC membership is a significant selling tool.

I’ve always stated that this forum often overrates enrollment of non-flagship/non-top research public universities and underrates top rated private schools, particularly those directly located in key markets (e.g. Chicago, Boston, Miami, Nashville, etc.).

I don’t think anyone in a P5 conference is EVER going to unilaterally downgrade regardless of the rules. When push comes to shove, Northwestern will absolutely pay to play if necessary because it’s just as much about competing for top academic students against Harvard and the University of Chicago as it is about competing against Michigan and Ohio State for top football recruits. The people paying $80,000 per year for tuition and room and board at places like Duke, Northwestern and Vandy absolutely want that big-time athletic atmosphere to distinguish themselves from the Ivy League.

Before the BTN Northwestern had contemplated approaching the Ivy.
The ACC had developed an expansion scenario that targeted Northwestern and Vanderbilt.
Presidents talk. They are looking for institutional fit, not total gross revenue of their potential partners. What they are looking for is a chance for their athletic teams to compete against peers.
In the long run, the B1G my want to associate with Northwestern, but Northwestern may choose to associate with schools that look more like them.

Northwestern thought about the Ivy League back in the 1980s, which might as well be the 1880s when it comes to how television revenue and branding is in today's world.

You're absolutely correct that the presidents are looking for institutional fit, but the supposition that the other Big Ten school don't "look" like Northwestern is based on a superficial public/private delineation. The Big Ten is still made up of many of the top academic research schools in the country. When it comes to actual academic research, Michigan can compete with any Ivy League school (and bests many of them) in any department and even schools like Illinois, Wisconsin, Ohio State and Purdue blow most of the Ivy League away in engineering.

I'd agree that Northwestern has a ton in common with Stanford, Duke and Vanderbilt as top tier private research universities in the P5. However, when you get past the public/private delineation, Northwestern actually doesn't have that much in common as an institution with Notre Dame, Boston College or Wake Forest. When it comes to the way schools look at themselves academically, Michigan is a heck of a lot more like Northwestern than Notre Dame is.

The distinction between being a private or public school is certainly relevant, but it's also not an automatic outcome determinative definition of institutional fit the way that a lot of people here seem to make it, either.
(This post was last modified: 02-06-2020 11:01 AM by Frank the Tank.)
02-06-2020 10:59 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Illini60940 Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 23
Joined: Feb 2020
Reputation: 2
I Root For: Illinois
Location:
Post: #288
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(02-06-2020 10:59 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(02-06-2020 05:54 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(02-05-2020 11:14 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(02-05-2020 09:52 AM)esayem Wrote:  I think there are certain advantages being associated with private schools. I don’t see that going away.

Absolutely! The Big Ten schools WANT the association with Northwestern.

By the same token, why is there an assumption that private schools would be less likely to participate in a pay for play environment? If anything, the Power Five private schools as a whole are among the wealthiest institutions in the nation. Taking Northwestern as an example, they could pay for its athletes with essentially a day’s worth of interest on its endowment. At the same time, they use their association with the Big Ten and its association with big-time athletics in its recruiting for academic students against the Ivy League and University of Chicago. Northwestern wants to maintain its association with the Big Ten as much as the Big Ten wants to keeps its association with them.

The association with big-time athletics is even more important for the schools just below the Northwestern/Duke academic tier, such as Wake Forest and Boston College. They’re competing for students against the likes of Emory, Boston University, Northeastern and Davidson, so their ACC membership is a significant selling tool.

I’ve always stated that this forum often overrates enrollment of non-flagship/non-top research public universities and underrates top rated private schools, particularly those directly located in key markets (e.g. Chicago, Boston, Miami, Nashville, etc.).

I don’t think anyone in a P5 conference is EVER going to unilaterally downgrade regardless of the rules. When push comes to shove, Northwestern will absolutely pay to play if necessary because it’s just as much about competing for top academic students against Harvard and the University of Chicago as it is about competing against Michigan and Ohio State for top football recruits. The people paying $80,000 per year for tuition and room and board at places like Duke, Northwestern and Vandy absolutely want that big-time athletic atmosphere to distinguish themselves from the Ivy League.

Before the BTN Northwestern had contemplated approaching the Ivy.
The ACC had developed an expansion scenario that targeted Northwestern and Vanderbilt.
Presidents talk. They are looking for institutional fit, not total gross revenue of their potential partners. What they are looking for is a chance for their athletic teams to compete against peers.
In the long run, the B1G my want to associate with Northwestern, but Northwestern may choose to associate with schools that look more like them.

Northwestern thought about the Ivy League back in the 1980s, which might as well be the 1880s when it comes to how television revenue and branding is in today's world.

You're absolutely correct that the presidents are looking for institutional fit, but the supposition that the other Big Ten school don't "look" like Northwestern is based on a superficial public/private delineation. The Big Ten is still made up of many of the top academic research schools in the country. When it comes to actual academic research, Michigan can compete with any Ivy League school (and bests many of them) in any department and even schools like Illinois, Wisconsin, Ohio State and Purdue blow most of the Ivy League away in engineering.

I'd agree that Northwestern has a ton in common with Stanford, Duke and Vanderbilt as top tier private research universities in the P5. However, when you get past the public/private delineation, Northwestern actually doesn't have that much in common as an institution with Notre Dame, Boston College or Wake Forest. When it comes to the way schools look at themselves academically, Michigan is a heck of a lot more like Northwestern than Notre Dame is.

The distinction between being a private or public school is certainly relevant, but it's also not an automatic outcome determinative definition of institutional fit the way that a lot of people here seem to make it, either.

Great post!
02-06-2020 11:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 22,846
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2166
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #289
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(02-06-2020 11:18 AM)Illini60940 Wrote:  
(02-06-2020 10:59 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(02-06-2020 05:54 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(02-05-2020 11:14 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(02-05-2020 09:52 AM)esayem Wrote:  I think there are certain advantages being associated with private schools. I don’t see that going away.

Absolutely! The Big Ten schools WANT the association with Northwestern.

By the same token, why is there an assumption that private schools would be less likely to participate in a pay for play environment? If anything, the Power Five private schools as a whole are among the wealthiest institutions in the nation. Taking Northwestern as an example, they could pay for its athletes with essentially a day’s worth of interest on its endowment. At the same time, they use their association with the Big Ten and its association with big-time athletics in its recruiting for academic students against the Ivy League and University of Chicago. Northwestern wants to maintain its association with the Big Ten as much as the Big Ten wants to keeps its association with them.

The association with big-time athletics is even more important for the schools just below the Northwestern/Duke academic tier, such as Wake Forest and Boston College. They’re competing for students against the likes of Emory, Boston University, Northeastern and Davidson, so their ACC membership is a significant selling tool.

I’ve always stated that this forum often overrates enrollment of non-flagship/non-top research public universities and underrates top rated private schools, particularly those directly located in key markets (e.g. Chicago, Boston, Miami, Nashville, etc.).

I don’t think anyone in a P5 conference is EVER going to unilaterally downgrade regardless of the rules. When push comes to shove, Northwestern will absolutely pay to play if necessary because it’s just as much about competing for top academic students against Harvard and the University of Chicago as it is about competing against Michigan and Ohio State for top football recruits. The people paying $80,000 per year for tuition and room and board at places like Duke, Northwestern and Vandy absolutely want that big-time athletic atmosphere to distinguish themselves from the Ivy League.

Before the BTN Northwestern had contemplated approaching the Ivy.
The ACC had developed an expansion scenario that targeted Northwestern and Vanderbilt.
Presidents talk. They are looking for institutional fit, not total gross revenue of their potential partners. What they are looking for is a chance for their athletic teams to compete against peers.
In the long run, the B1G my want to associate with Northwestern, but Northwestern may choose to associate with schools that look more like them.

Northwestern thought about the Ivy League back in the 1980s, which might as well be the 1880s when it comes to how television revenue and branding is in today's world.

You're absolutely correct that the presidents are looking for institutional fit, but the supposition that the other Big Ten school don't "look" like Northwestern is based on a superficial public/private delineation. The Big Ten is still made up of many of the top academic research schools in the country. When it comes to actual academic research, Michigan can compete with any Ivy League school (and bests many of them) in any department and even schools like Illinois, Wisconsin, Ohio State and Purdue blow most of the Ivy League away in engineering.

I'd agree that Northwestern has a ton in common with Stanford, Duke and Vanderbilt as top tier private research universities in the P5. However, when you get past the public/private delineation, Northwestern actually doesn't have that much in common as an institution with Notre Dame, Boston College or Wake Forest. When it comes to the way schools look at themselves academically, Michigan is a heck of a lot more like Northwestern than Notre Dame is.

The distinction between being a private or public school is certainly relevant, but it's also not an automatic outcome determinative definition of institutional fit the way that a lot of people here seem to make it, either.

Great post!

Looking back 40 years one can always count on the same outcomes. Looking forward just a few years the picture is quite different. While I'm not one who thinks Northwestern is going anywhere, funding is only going to become more crucial than it was in the 1980's. There is a big dip in college age population looming, state funds are much tighter than they were in the 80's, and federal funds are too.

You are going to see venerated schools making decisions you would never have thought possible, and yes the state flagships and land-grant schools are going to cluster and grow as the schools that sprang up under the GI Bill, grew under the Boomers, and looked solid under the X'ers start to be consolidated, retooled, or absorbed in larger state systems and small privates and JUCO's either close or are retooled.

I brought this up 7 years ago and nobody thought it possible, and yet we are in the late early stages of this already.

This is why all revenue streams, even sports revenue, are going to be important to keeping the image of the larger schools before prospective students, important to the appearance of health and University as expected, which means all of those minor non-revenue sports being maintained from the proceeds of the revenue sports, and keeping shrinking donor bases involved.

If you worked with fundraising for the past 40 years you have witnessed the best vested generation of this country pass already, the WWII group. The were raised before the advent of the credit industry, owned what they owned (no mortgages, no car payments, no student loans) and were by and large independent businessmen and businesswomen. They gave to the institutions they loved and revered them because they saw them as major parts in the holding together of a society under duress.

By 2035 statistically the Boomers will have passed. The grew up with consumer credit, car loans, and student debt, but worse they grew up with something their parents tended not to suffer from, the need to keep up their image and stay up with the Joneses. The average Boomer, though vested enough from the inheritances they gleaned from their parents, enter retirement with debt, not NET debt but with debt. What they will pass on to their children will be worth less than what their parents passed onto them. And their numbers inflated everything so that the X'ers they produced have suffered from the inflation for most of their lives and owe far more than their parents did. Millennials may well see a period of deflation in their lives in the not too distant future. Unemployment numbers have been greatly aided in part by Boomer retirements. But the over impact of this will be two or three decades of flat charitable giving and even the number of wealthy donors giving to their alma maters is in decline.

The rise of corporate grants brings with it some legal snares as to intellectual property.

So all revenue streams are going to be prized, but none so much as those without strings, and media revenue other than the sale of sports rights, is one of those.

So Xlance the schools are gong to be very concerned with total revenue numbers, not so much each others as their own. But associating with peers means a synergy and athletic revenue figures is a strong indication of donor strength, attendance and gate related revenue, and the ability of that school's fan base to augment your revenue in competition. It is much nicer to have full venues than not, and is much more likely to attract the attention of TV networks who like such things.

So if Texas or Oklahoma look around for a new home, success will be the greatest aphrodisiac, because they all are image conscious now, which they absolutely weren't 40 years ago when the only broadcast image they saw was on ABC and then only a dozen or so games were shown and only a dozen or so top programs might be shown in any given year because of it.

Stocks are very similar to sports. If you look at what performed well in the last 20 years it might give you a trend. But if you look at the coming demographic shifts you'll be a lot better prepared for a future return, than if you look at the companies who were profitable in 80's or 90's or even the 00's. .
02-06-2020 12:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
texoma Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 110
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Collegefootball
Location:
Post: #290
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(02-06-2020 08:07 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(02-06-2020 06:36 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Either the SEC and B1G split the two big fish (OU & Texas) or they both stay in the XII. I don't think either league gets both of them. I also don't think Texas goes Indy and has to put it's other sports in a conference thats below their (perceived) standards. Texas wants all of it's sports in the big leagues.

If Texas leaves the Big 12 (or the Big 12 dissolves), the Longhorn's have only three realistic choices: the B1G, the ACC, or the ACC as a Notre Dame type partial.

Then they will go to the Big10. Texas will never agree to be on island with the
ACC. They are Texas, they make more money than anybody. They do not have to settle.

Therefore the ACC is not a possibility for them. The only way they would even remotely consider the ACC, is if they brought 5 or more teams with them, i.e. a Big12 merger with the ACC. Yeah, I know Dodds once mentioned the ACC, but he was just calling David Boren's bluff about going to the PAC with OSU.

And Rutgersguy, I agree, Texas wants all of their sports in the big leagues. However, that will not prevent them from going Indy in football. If OU leaves the Big12 without Texas, then Texas would most likely go Indy football and leave their other sports teams in the Big12 with a Notre Dame type arrangement. That would be a big league for their other sports.
(This post was last modified: 02-06-2020 05:29 PM by texoma.)
02-06-2020 12:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,831
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 247
I Root For: Carolina
Location:
Post: #291
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(02-06-2020 10:59 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(02-06-2020 05:54 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(02-05-2020 11:14 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(02-05-2020 09:52 AM)esayem Wrote:  I think there are certain advantages being associated with private schools. I don’t see that going away.

Absolutely! The Big Ten schools WANT the association with Northwestern.

By the same token, why is there an assumption that private schools would be less likely to participate in a pay for play environment? If anything, the Power Five private schools as a whole are among the wealthiest institutions in the nation. Taking Northwestern as an example, they could pay for its athletes with essentially a day’s worth of interest on its endowment. At the same time, they use their association with the Big Ten and its association with big-time athletics in its recruiting for academic students against the Ivy League and University of Chicago. Northwestern wants to maintain its association with the Big Ten as much as the Big Ten wants to keeps its association with them.

The association with big-time athletics is even more important for the schools just below the Northwestern/Duke academic tier, such as Wake Forest and Boston College. They’re competing for students against the likes of Emory, Boston University, Northeastern and Davidson, so their ACC membership is a significant selling tool.

I’ve always stated that this forum often overrates enrollment of non-flagship/non-top research public universities and underrates top rated private schools, particularly those directly located in key markets (e.g. Chicago, Boston, Miami, Nashville, etc.).

I don’t think anyone in a P5 conference is EVER going to unilaterally downgrade regardless of the rules. When push comes to shove, Northwestern will absolutely pay to play if necessary because it’s just as much about competing for top academic students against Harvard and the University of Chicago as it is about competing against Michigan and Ohio State for top football recruits. The people paying $80,000 per year for tuition and room and board at places like Duke, Northwestern and Vandy absolutely want that big-time athletic atmosphere to distinguish themselves from the Ivy League.

Before the BTN Northwestern had contemplated approaching the Ivy.
The ACC had developed an expansion scenario that targeted Northwestern and Vanderbilt.
Presidents talk. They are looking for institutional fit, not total gross revenue of their potential partners. What they are looking for is a chance for their athletic teams to compete against peers.
In the long run, the B1G my want to associate with Northwestern, but Northwestern may choose to associate with schools that look more like them.

Northwestern thought about the Ivy League back in the 1980s, which might as well be the 1880s when it comes to how television revenue and branding is in today's world.

You're absolutely correct that the presidents are looking for institutional fit, but the supposition that the other Big Ten school don't "look" like Northwestern is based on a superficial public/private delineation. The Big Ten is still made up of many of the top academic research schools in the country. When it comes to actual academic research, Michigan can compete with any Ivy League school (and bests many of them) in any department and even schools like Illinois, Wisconsin, Ohio State and Purdue blow most of the Ivy League away in engineering.

I'd agree that Northwestern has a ton in common with Stanford, Duke and Vanderbilt as top tier private research universities in the P5. However, when you get past the public/private delineation, Northwestern actually doesn't have that much in common as an institution with Notre Dame, Boston College or Wake Forest. When it comes to the way schools look at themselves academically, Michigan is a heck of a lot more like Northwestern than Notre Dame is.

The distinction between being a private or public school is certainly relevant, but it's also not an automatic outcome determinative definition of institutional fit the way that a lot of people here seem to make it, either.

Northwestern is somewhat unique for a P5 school.
Like Johns-Hopkins and Duke , Northwestern has more graduate students than undergrads. Carolina was headed in that direction a few years ago (and was actually a big concern for South Carolina when they had talks with the ACC circa 2010).
With UG populations between 6,500 and 8,300 Duke, Northwestern and Vanderbilt are similar sized institutions, and are academic peers.

If we do move to pay for play.......................
(This post was last modified: 02-06-2020 01:50 PM by XLance.)
02-06-2020 01:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,174
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 558
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Mouth of Wilson, VA
Post: #292
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(02-06-2020 12:54 PM)texoma Wrote:  
(02-06-2020 08:07 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(02-06-2020 06:36 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Either the SEC and B1G split the two big fish (OU & Texas) or they both stay in the XII. I don't think either league gets both of them. I also don't think Texas goes Indy and has to put it's other sports in a conference thats below their (perceived) standards. Texas wants all of it's sports in the big leagues.

If Texas leaves the Big 12 (or the Big 12 dissolves), the Longhorn's have only three realistic choices: the B1G, the ACC, or the ACC as a Notre Dame type partial.

Then they will go to the Big10. Texas will never agree to be on island with the
ACC. They are Texas, they make more money than anybody. They do not have to settle.

Therefore the ACC is not a possibility for them. The only way they would even remotely consider the ACC, is if they brought 5 or more teams with them, i.e. a merger with the ACC. Yeah,I know Dodds once mentioned the ACC, but he was just calling David Boren's bluff about going to the PAC with OSU.

And Rutgers guy, if OU leaves the Big12 without Texas, then Texas would most likely go Indy football and leave their other sports teams in the Big12 with a Notre Dame type arrangement.
That would be a big league for their other sports.

That would be fun. I would love to see that happen.
02-06-2020 02:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
schmolik Online
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 94
Joined: Sep 2019
Reputation: 4
I Root For: UIUC, PSU, Nova
Location: Philadelphia Suburbs
Post: #293
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(02-06-2020 06:36 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Either the SEC and B1G split the two big fish (OU & Texas) or they both stay in the XII. I don't think either league gets both of them. I also don't think Texas goes Indy and has to put it's other sports in a conference thats below their (perceived) standards. Texas wants all of it's sports in the big leagues.

How about Texas/Kansas in the Big Ten and Oklahoma/Oklahoma State in the SEC?
02-13-2020 03:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,831
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 247
I Root For: Carolina
Location:
Post: #294
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(02-13-2020 03:48 PM)schmolik Wrote:  
(02-06-2020 06:36 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Either the SEC and B1G split the two big fish (OU & Texas) or they both stay in the XII. I don't think either league gets both of them. I also don't think Texas goes Indy and has to put it's other sports in a conference thats below their (perceived) standards. Texas wants all of it's sports in the big leagues.

How about Texas/Kansas in the Big Ten and Oklahoma/Oklahoma State in the SEC?

That move would not surprise me at all.
02-13-2020 04:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Baylorbears11 Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 93
Joined: Apr 2009
Reputation: 15
I Root For: Baylor
Location:
Post: #295
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(02-13-2020 04:22 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 03:48 PM)schmolik Wrote:  
(02-06-2020 06:36 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Either the SEC and B1G split the two big fish (OU & Texas) or they both stay in the XII. I don't think either league gets both of them. I also don't think Texas goes Indy and has to put it's other sports in a conference thats below their (perceived) standards. Texas wants all of it's sports in the big leagues.

How about Texas/Kansas in the Big Ten and Oklahoma/Oklahoma State in the SEC?

That move would not surprise me at all.

Texas’ nearest road game and conference opponent would be in Lawrence, Kansas. That is just not going to happen.
02-13-2020 04:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2020 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2020 MyBB Group.