(07-02-2019 08:21 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(07-02-2019 07:49 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-02-2019 07:11 AM)orangefan Wrote:  Some general observations.

When the Bowl Coalition began play in 1992, there were seven power conferences (conferences whose champions received automatic bids to a major bowl) consisting of 66 schools. Today, there are five power conferences consisting of 64 total schools.

Over that period, while there has obviously been a massive game of musical chairs, that's a net reduction of two schools.

Four schools in power conferences at the start of the Bowl Coalition are no longer members of a P5 conference - Houston, SMU, Rice and Temple. Only two schools that were not part of a power conference are now members of a P5 conference - Louisville and Utah.

Utah was the state flagship university from the largest states that did not have a power school at that time. That is a status that no school not already with that qualification can obtain. Basically, only three schools, UConn, Nevada and New Mexico, are flagships in states that are larger than the smallest states that already have a P5 school - West Virginia and Nebraska.

Louisville benefited from its location in a city that is near major league in size but with no major league franchises (it is a larger TV market than Buffalo, Memphis or New Orleans), being in a state with only one other power school, and having a willingness to spend extraordinary amounts on coaches and facilities (its football and basketball venues are NFL and NBA quality venues in which it is the only major tenant).

Bottom line - this club is more exclusive than Augusta National. Good luck to all, but don't hold your breath.

Utah also had the extraordinary political muscle of Orrin Hatch waiving his sabre at the BCS for five years behind them, and of course Louisville is still in the G5 if Maryland hadn't left the ACC for the B1G.

IMO, if any current G5 is in a P5 in the next 10 years, it will only come as "backfill", the way Louisville got the ACC bid. Close to zero chance that any P5 would pro-actively "expand" with any current G5.

We all know this, which is why fans of schools stuck in the G5 are always hopefully speculating about Big 12 implosion or PAC implosion or ACC implosion - whichever looks most likely at the time. Because only that kind of thing can give our school an opportunity.

One more thought - UConn is probably the most similar P5 candidate to either Utah or Louisville, and it just gave up.

I think Cincy, Houston, and Memphis have more in common with Louisville than UConn.

(07-02-2019 09:31 AM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  

(07-02-2019 08:21 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(07-02-2019 07:49 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-02-2019 07:11 AM)orangefan Wrote:  Some general observations.

When the Bowl Coalition began play in 1992, there were seven power conferences (conferences whose champions received automatic bids to a major bowl) consisting of 66 schools. Today, there are five power conferences consisting of 64 total schools.

Over that period, while there has obviously been a massive game of musical chairs, that's a net reduction of two schools.

Four schools in power conferences at the start of the Bowl Coalition are no longer members of a P5 conference - Houston, SMU, Rice and Temple. Only two schools that were not part of a power conference are now members of a P5 conference - Louisville and Utah.

Utah was the state flagship university from the largest states that did not have a power school at that time. That is a status that no school not already with that qualification can obtain. Basically, only three schools, UConn, Nevada and New Mexico, are flagships in states that are larger than the smallest states that already have a P5 school - West Virginia and Nebraska.

Louisville benefited from its location in a city that is near major league in size but with no major league franchises (it is a larger TV market than Buffalo, Memphis or New Orleans), being in a state with only one other power school, and having a willingness to spend extraordinary amounts on coaches and facilities (its football and basketball venues are NFL and NBA quality venues in which it is the only major tenant).

Bottom line - this club is more exclusive than Augusta National. Good luck to all, but don't hold your breath.

Utah also had the extraordinary political muscle of Orrin Hatch waiving his sabre at the BCS for five years behind them, and of course Louisville is still in the G5 if Maryland hadn't left the ACC for the B1G.

IMO, if any current G5 is in a P5 in the next 10 years, it will only come as "backfill", the way Louisville got the ACC bid. Close to zero chance that any P5 would pro-actively "expand" with any current G5.

We all know this, which is why fans of schools stuck in the G5 are always hopefully speculating about Big 12 implosion or PAC implosion or ACC implosion - whichever looks most likely at the time. Because only that kind of thing can give our school an opportunity.

One more thought - UConn is probably the most similar P5 candidate to either Utah or Louisville, and it just gave up.

I think Cincy, Houston, and Memphis have more in common with Louisville than UConn.

No doubt they all have various similarities. The three schools you identify are all "Urban Research" universities very similar in mission to UL. I cited three factors that supported UL's success in reaching P5 status:

Market:
Louisville: #49 tv market, no pro teams
Hartford: #32, no pro teams
Houston: #7, NFL, MLB and NBA franchises
Cincinnati: #35, NFL and MLB franchises
Memphis: #50, NBA franchise

Other P5 programs in the state:
Kentucky: One
Connecticut: None
Texas: Five
Ohio: One
Tennessee: Two

Venues:
Louisville: Football: 61,000 (1998), Basketball: 22,000 (2010)
UConn: Football: 40,000 (2002), Basketball: 16,000 (Excel Center, 1975)
Houston: Football: 40,000 (2014), Basketball: 7,000 (2018 renovations)
Cincinnati: Football: 40,000 (1915, renovated 2015), Basketball: 12,000 (1989)
Memphis: Football: 58,000 (1965), Basketball: 18,000 (2004)

I will add one factor in which UL does not perform well, but is extremely important to P5 conferences:

USNWR Ranking:
Louisville: #171
UConn: #63
Houston: #171
Cincinnati: #147
Memphis: #230-301

UL received an invitation despite this relatively poor ranking, especially for the ACC, which has no other school outside the top 80.

(07-02-2019 09:31 AM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  I think Cincy, Houston, and Memphis have more in common with Louisville than UConn.

Very true - those three schools are all 150+ in the US News rankings or thereabouts, very much like Louisville, whereas UConn is around #65.

(07-02-2019 07:11 AM)orangefan Wrote:  Some general observations.

When the Bowl Coalition began play in 1992, there were seven power conferences (conferences whose champions received automatic bids to a major bowl) consisting of 66 schools. Today, there are five power conferences consisting of 64 total schools.

Over that period, while there has obviously been a massive game of musical chairs, that's a net reduction of two schools.

Four schools in power conferences at the start of the Bowl Coalition are no longer members of a P5 conference - Houston, SMU, Rice and Temple. Only two schools that were not part of a power conference are now members of a P5 conference - Louisville and Utah.

Utah was the state flagship university from the largest states that did not have a power school at that time. That is a status that no school not already with that qualification can obtain. Basically, only three schools, UConn, Nevada and New Mexico, are flagships in states that are larger than the smallest states that already have a P5 school - West Virginia and Nebraska.

Louisville benefited from its location in a city that is near major league in size but with no major league franchises (it is a larger TV market than Buffalo, Memphis or New Orleans), being in a state with only one other power school, and having a willingness to spend extraordinary amounts on coaches and facilities (its football and basketball venues are NFL and NBA quality venues in which it is the only major tenant).

Bottom line - this club is more exclusive than Augusta National. Good luck to all, but don't hold your breath.

Louisville benefitted most from having a historically successful basketball team and then spending a lot of money to leverage that visibility into building a football team.

And as mentioned they owe a huge thank you to the Big Ten. They're in the ACC only because Maryland went to the Big Ten.

Utah owes a huge thank you to Texas. The Utes are in the Pac only because the Longhorns turned down the Pac-16 plan.

Anyone who gets into the club going forward will also need enormous doses of luck and good timing.

The question how long before the ACC Network be a failure? Their football ratings are down to the level as the AAC. SEC and Big 10 could raid them before their next contract is up.

The schools likely to leave for better payouts would be:
Florida State
Georgia Tech
Clemson
UNC
NC State
Virginia
Virginia Tech

Miami we know cook their books on how many fans in their seats.
Duke is more like the Big East schools. Basketball 1st, and their football facilities are lightyears away from other P5 schools.
Wake Forest is the same as Duke.
Pittsburgh is more like Houston and Cincinnati. Pro sports town with a lack of fan support.
Syracuse bowed out of the AAU, or they would have been taken by the Big 10 before Rutgers.
Boston College like UConn and other northeastern schools been losing fan support in football. BC could wind up in the Big East if they are to also dropped football.
Nobody wants Louisville now because of their scandals.

I think the ACC's top schools may leave the conference for better tv ratings and payouts. ACC would be the ones that will be picked apart.

Any expansion will depend on the Big 12. If Texas and OU decide to keep the conference together, then there will be no further expansion. The PAC-12 really has no need to expand. The Big 10, SEC and ACC can stand pat.

The Big 10 added Rutgers and Maryland for three reasons. The obvious was their TV markets. The second was their academic profiles (AAU and flagship status). The last one was both schools have the best football recruiting areas outside of the SEC footprint.

(07-02-2019 07:11 AM)orangefan Wrote:  Some general observations.

When the Bowl Coalition began play in 1992, there were seven power conferences (conferences whose champions received automatic bids to a major bowl) consisting of 66 schools. Today, there are five power conferences consisting of 64 total schools.

Over that period, while there has obviously been a massive game of musical chairs, that's a net reduction of two schools.

Four schools in power conferences at the start of the Bowl Coalition are no longer members of a P5 conference - Houston, SMU, Rice and Temple. Only two schools that were not part of a power conference are now members of a P5 conference - Louisville and Utah.

Utah was the state flagship university from the largest states that did not have a power school at that time. That is a status that no school not already with that qualification can obtain. Basically, only three schools, UConn, Nevada and New Mexico, are flagships in states that are larger than the smallest states that already have a P5 school - West Virginia and Nebraska.

Louisville benefited from its location in a city that is near major league in size but with no major league franchises (it is a larger TV market than Buffalo, Memphis or New Orleans), being in a state with only one other power school, and having a willingness to spend extraordinary amounts on coaches and facilities (its football and basketball venues are NFL and NBA quality venues in which it is the only major tenant).

Bottom line - this club is more exclusive than Augusta National. Good luck to all, but don't hold your breath.

Good post but the AAC is filling the void of a 6th major conference with its TV presence and investments. The BE of course is another major conference but without football.

If you added the AAC/BE as major conferences to the P5 then you are back to seven conferences.

For the G4 the path to major conference status is going rely on a chance an expanded CFP that will send their champ to a major bowl game guaranteed. They can't do it with TV like the AAC or basketball like the BE. That is why I see the NY10 is the answer even more so than going to 8 because having a champ guaranteed to a major bowl makes a conference by default major.

(06-29-2019 01:18 AM)33laszlo99 Wrote:  

(06-28-2019 11:39 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  1. as pointed out the $550 million calculation is incorrect

the Big 12 will be paying out about $46 million per year with no third tier included at the end of their contract

a school would need to cover that 100% and then add at least $12 million more (because they are not going to go to 11) and if two schools managed to do that then that would be about $2 million more for the Big 12 members for adding two teams or $48 million and that is if the best deal the Big 12 can get is a deal that pays them basically even money from their past deal plus $2 million more for adding two teams

so a school would need to add about $60 million each to even be considered

2. the difficulty with this is that would need to be TV MONEY because there is not going to be an increase in the $50+ million paid for the NCAA football playoffs nor will there be an increase in the (2 out of 3 years) $40 million Sugar Bowl money

so if you do the math on that it is (($50 million X 3) + ($40 million X 2)) / 3 or about $77 million a year to the conference in money not directly from a TV contract

so a media partner would need to be paying the freight for adding two teams and the cost to the conference members of that in relation to the NY6 and NCAA playoff credits

and no to anyone that wants to suggest this getting another team in "random bowl game" (that pays $1.2 million a year that is eaten up mostly with expenses) does not cover that it covers the cost of having another team in the conference going to a lower level bowl

because again even if the new members rotated going to the NY6 bowl every year that does not bring new money to the conference it just bumps the other members all down a spot in the bowl order until one team fills the last lower level bowl

3. the next issue is NCAA basketball credits the Big 12 does extremely well on those as it is now....new members would have NONE

even if they were earning them at a high rate that would only barely cover them being equal to the already high earning Big 12 or if they were just both amazing it might add $300,000 or so which does not come close to covering the gap created by factor #2

so really you need two teams that combined bring in about $120 million combined and really more than that because that would be the Big 12 flat lining on their next media deal and not even getting one that starts at the same $46 million they paid out the prior year and then scales to the end of the deal

so if the Big 12 got a deal that paid $1 million more than the prior year to start and scaled $1 million per year for X number of years then the new members would need to start tacking on that additional money to their needed value


and doing the math for what it would take to get the Big 12 to lose two teams so that others can move up just looks less realistic

A. you are now talking about the top earners in the Big 12 moving elsewhere so Texas will be making $46 million plus $15 million in the final year of the Big 12 contract so a total of $61 million.....and of course that $15 million from the LHN is locked in past the end of the current Big 12 media deal

OU will probably be making about $52 or more depending on how their third tier deal plays out

so now you have the Big 12 currently paying out $36.5 million while the PAC 12 and ACC pay out $30 million or so and that is excluding the LHN and Sooner Sports money that those two top earning teams earn

it makes ZERO sense to pretend that you take two teams one earning $51.5 million and another earning $42.5 or $43.5 million in a 10 team conference and instead place them in a 12 or 14 team conference and then bump up 12 or 14 other teams to $51.5 million (if you want Texas) or $43.5 million (if you want just OU)

that is horrible math and not realistic to the market to think that you have valued those other conferences at a lower per member value for a larger group of teams, but somehow it makes sense to pay massive amounts of new money to those 12 or 14 teams because you moved one or two teams in with them

B. and no "cable rates" will do nothing.....if the ACC is going to get decent money from their new network much less good money they they will already need to be getting high cable fees from most all of the USA to do so and even if they get great money it will probably only catch them up to the Big 12 excluding any LHN or Sooner Sports money so there is still a huge gap to fill there

and even comcrap in Houston did not pay "in market" rates for the SECn SECn SECn because aggy was added so adding Texas and OU is not a guarantee of that and doing just that cramming networks and charging "in state" is why people are cutting the cord in droves

C. then there is the same issue with Rose or Orange Bowl money and NCAA playoff money and NCAA credits.....Texas and OU will bring no new money to any conference for any of that and they will have to start earning NCAA credits to just cover themselves much less add to the conference and that does not come close to covering the additional splits of Rose or Orange Bowl money or NCAA playoff credits

D. so the math that the OP did with the $550 million (that was incorrect in relation to moving a G5 to the Big 12) is probably closer to correct for moving Texas or OU to another P5 conference

lets use the PAC 12 as an example.....$50 million football playoffs.....$40 million Rose two out of 3 years = $6.38 million per team per year on average with 12 teams in the PAC 12

bump that to 14 that is $5.48 so a loss of $824,000 per team per year X 12 teams or a total of $9.9 million per year (we will call it $10)

so there is $5 million a year each Texas and OU need to bring over and above covering their own payouts for everything else

then you have Texas making $51 million per year at the end of the Big 12 contract while the PAC 12 will probably be at about $37 (they are at $30 now and the deal scales just like the Big 12 deal does)

so there is $14 million needed just to get Texas to even money for moving....and the PAC 10 did have uneven revenue sharing in the past and USC and UCLA did make demands on the other schools with the new contract, but no chance they let Texas or Texas and OU have uneven revenues

so now you need to bump 12 other teams up $14 million EACH and then you need to bump OU up about $7 million

so now you have $14 X 12 + $7 + $10 (the money to cover Rose and playoff money cuts) so that totals $180 million per year needed to get Texas and OU to the PAC 12 and just break even on the money paid for all those programs in the final year of their current contracts

then there are the exit fees even if Texas and OU are able to skate away only having the final year distribution withheld that is $46 million each or $92 million.....that is 1 time not yearly, but that still adds up that is another $9.2 million on a 10 year contact so now $189.2 million per year needed to get Texas and OU to the PAC 12

E. here is where everyone says "money saved by dumping Big 12 teams and now paying them nothing" (as if those teams will simply get nothing

not to mention it is HIGHLY unlikely that Texas and OU will want to be in a 14 team conference on a far east Island in the crap half of that conference playing teams their fans never cared about in the Big 12 (and barely in the Big 8) or that they never cared about at all

so if you add in OkState and Texas Tech the cost just goes through the roof

plus you are looking at $189.2 million PER YEAR to move just Texas and OU so if you divide that by 8 that is $23.65 million per year

or just about what the Big 12 will be earning in strictly TV money in the final year of the contract

so basically you would be break even on money moving Texas and OU to the PAC 12 and paying the PAC 12 even money to what Texas will be earning and that is pretending like you pay the others in the Big 12 zero after that and pretending that Texas and OU would go alone

and for that you get a lot less content and a lot more convoluted conferences that will probably not last long

it would make much more financial sense to go the other way and add 4 schools to the 10 already making a lot more money

and if you do the math of Texas and OU to the ACC the numbers are probably worse and to the SEC SEC SEC probably not good at all and to the Big 10 still probably not good and the Big 10 will have the buy in that Texas will not be eating and if Texas does not eat it then OU will not eat it.....and even if the Big 10 puts it in to shut up NU someone will be laying Texas and OU to not eat that buy in

Wow, you've got some really good arguments there. I would not try to dispute them outright, though like all things "realignment" your math is based on a lot of speculation. So is mine. I can readily agree that moving Texas and Oklahoma to the PAC 12 or ACC would be senseless because those two conferences are earning less media money than the Big XII; unworkable.
Another fact I think should always be noted is that Texas could form a conference with all the state universities in the State of Texas and be entirely financially viable. They will always be flush with money, so whatever might motivate them to move will have to be in addition to big bucks. But money still matters. It always matters.
Now I'll speculate. The SEC and the B1G are not the only two parties who would like to separate Oklahoma and Texas from the Big XII. ESPN groused every time a G5 school was promoted to a P5 conference. Rutgers, TCU, Pitt, Syaracuse, etc. How much was ESPN paying for these schools media rights in their old conference compared to what the rate is today. At best these schools could be making AAC money today had they not been added to P5 conferences. In the last few years it has amounted to hundreds of millions of dollars.
In each conference you will find duds that are being overpaid simply because of the longstanding alliances they have with their conferences. ESPN can't really do anything about it. But they did disuade the Big XII from adding teams #11 and #12 because they didn't want to pay for two more promotions. And when the Big XII media deal expires, it will be an opportunity to actually reduce the number of schools being paid at the highest level. The conference without OK and TX would not likely fall immdiately to AAC level money. But look at the conference without the two principal players. Is it a compelling combination of football/athletic brands and advertising footprint? I'm not disparaging the schools themselves or the athletic programs. I'm looking at what they offer to ESPN or Fox that those media companies don't already have.
The B1G and the SEC will both come a-courting. The B1G media payout was 54.7 in 2018. What will that look like by 2023 (the last year of their deal)? The new contract begining in 2024 will be interesting because we may see new media companies involved (I know, speculation). The SEC's current deal is trailing close behind the B1G, and they rework their Tier 1 deal begining in 2024 as well. This adds up to a financial tug-o-war for those two football thouroughbreds. Maybe they will resist the overtures... maybe.

The big pay media pay you are talking about is all relative to the spending levels. In some P5 cases it can hardly cover the jumbo administrative costs.

OTOH, 5 million of media money for a mid major conference is huge.

Here's the best way to obtain P5 membership. I call it "The Louisville Method"

1. Be located in or near a large media market.

2. Get a sugar daddy donor to pay for new facilities.

3. Hire coaches that will trade in ethics and discipline for on field success and shady but successful recruiting practices.

4. Sit back and watch your school's success increase their stock. Your school may move to another higher prestige conference at this point.

5. Accept invite to a Power 5 conference when it is finally offered.

6. When your school's shady tactics are uncovered, simply fire the old coaches and administrators responsible. You may have lost your most successful coaches and might deal with punishments, but that sweet Power 5 conference membership won't be stripped from you!

(07-02-2019 10:56 PM)seaking4steel Wrote:  Here's the best way to obtain P5 membership. I call it "The Louisville Method"

1. Be located in or near a large media market.

2. Get a sugar daddy donor to pay for new facilities.

3. Hire coaches that will trade in ethics and discipline for on field success and shady but successful recruiting practices.

4. Sit back and watch your school's success increase their stock. Your school may move to another higher prestige conference at this point.

5. Accept invite to a Power 5 conference when it is finally offered.

6. When your school's shady tactics are uncovered, simply fire the old coaches and administrators responsible. You may have lost your most successful coaches and might deal with punishments, but that sweet Power 5 conference membership won't be stripped from you!

Ouch.

(07-02-2019 11:38 AM)orangefan Wrote:  I will add one factor in which UL does not perform well, but is extremely important to P5 conferences:

USNWR Ranking:
Louisville: #171
UConn: #63
Houston: #171
Cincinnati: #147
Memphis: #230-301

Academic Status is ... but the USNWR rankings are heavily gamed in the pursuit of undergrad enrollments, so other rankings may be more closely representative of academic status. China's AWRU rankings are all results oriented, rather than based on how much is spent to achieve those results, they have:

Louisville, 601-700 tier (*157-175 US)
UConn, 301-400 tier (96-117 US)
Houston, 201-300 tier (70-95 US)
Cincinnati, 301-400 tier (96-117 US)
Memphis, 901-1000 tier (*)

{* Note: AWRU does not give national tiers in the 500-1,000 range. I did a hand count for Louisville, but it might be off by one or two.}

(06-30-2019 01:09 PM)Wedge Wrote:  The Big 12 isn't salvageable for OU if UT leaves. Barely salvageable for UT if OU leaves, and even in that scenario would probably require the Big 12 bringing in at least 1 or 2 teams from existing P5 conferences, e.g., Arkansas switching conferences with Oklahoma, and that is so unlikely it's not even worth considering.

Still, the possibility of either UT or OU leaving the Big 12 in the near term is very overblown by rumormongers, IMO. UT doesn't need the money, they'll move only if they see very good non-monetary reasons, and I don't think any other conference wants to bring in OU without UT and then see UT go to one of their competitors.

The best scenario for any of the other power conferences is to bring in UT; the second-best scenario for any of these conferences is for UT to stay where they are and not make another conference stronger.

You mean like The Big12’s WVU fans?
Wouldn’t it be ironic that those most responsible for the conference “rumormongering” would suffer from the fate they long predicted for The ACC?

(07-03-2019 06:45 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-02-2019 11:38 AM)orangefan Wrote:  I will add one factor in which UL does not perform well, but is extremely important to P5 conferences:

USNWR Ranking:
Louisville: #171
UConn: #63
Houston: #171
Cincinnati: #147
Memphis: #230-301

Academic Status is ... but the USNWR rankings are heavily gamed in the pursuit of undergrad enrollments, so other rankings may be more closely representative of academic status. China's AWRU rankings are all results oriented, rather than based on how much is spent to achieve those results, they have:

Louisville, 601-700 tier (*157-175 US)
UConn, 301-400 tier (96-117 US)
Houston, 201-300 tier (70-95 US)
Cincinnati, 301-400 tier (96-117 US)
Memphis, 901-1000 tier (*)

{* Note: AWRU does not give national tiers in the 500-1,000 range. I did a hand count for Louisville, but it might be off by one or two.}

Since USF lands in that same 201-300 tier as Houston, I've always been a fan of the AWRU ranking system over the USNWR one...

USFFan

(07-03-2019 08:50 AM)usffan Wrote:  

(07-03-2019 06:45 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  ... China's AWRU rankings are all results oriented, rather than based on how much is spent to achieve those results, they have:

Louisville, 601-700 tier (*157-175 US)
UConn, 301-400 tier (96-117 US)
Houston, 201-300 tier (70-95 US)
Cincinnati, 301-400 tier (96-117 US)
Memphis, 901-1000 tier (*)

{* Note: AWRU does not give national tiers in the 500-1,000 range. I did a hand count for Louisville, but it might be off by one or two.}

Since USF lands in that same 201-300 tier as Houston, I've always been a fan of the AWRU ranking system over the USNWR one...

USFFan

Can't say I'm actually a fan of a ranking that puts Houston above UC. The AWRU reflects Chinese sensibilities, so some good STEM departments do you a lot of good in that ranking.

But it's a harder to game than the USNWR ... partly because "getting good results without spending as much resources as others" isn't "gaming the system" as much as "doing a good job".

(07-03-2019 08:50 AM)usffan Wrote:  Since USF lands in that same 201-300 tier as Houston, I've always been a fan of the AWRU ranking system over the USNWR one...

USFFan

Houston fans always try to boost Houston by citing rankings nobody cares about. Bottom line is that US News rankings are what both the public AND college administrators care about.

And since USF is #124 in US News, and Houston is #171 is US News, I am more than happy to discuss the US News rankings.

(07-03-2019 09:22 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-03-2019 08:50 AM)usffan Wrote:  

(07-03-2019 06:45 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  ... China's AWRU rankings are all results oriented, rather than based on how much is spent to achieve those results, they have:

Louisville, 601-700 tier (*157-175 US)
UConn, 301-400 tier (96-117 US)
Houston, 201-300 tier (70-95 US)
Cincinnati, 301-400 tier (96-117 US)
Memphis, 901-1000 tier (*)

{* Note: AWRU does not give national tiers in the 500-1,000 range. I did a hand count for Louisville, but it might be off by one or two.}

Since USF lands in that same 201-300 tier as Houston, I've always been a fan of the AWRU ranking system over the USNWR one...

USFFan

Can't say I'm actually a fan of a ranking that puts Houston above UC. The AWRU reflects Chinese sensibilities, so some good STEM departments do you a lot of good in that ranking.

But it's a harder to game than the USNWR ... partly because "getting good results without spending as much resources as others" isn't "gaming the system" as much as "doing a good job".

When I found out that one of the metrics for departmental rankings in the USNWR was to send surveys to each department chair and ask them to score each department from 1-5, I realized it was nothing more than a reputation-based beauty contest intended to sell magazines and online subscriptions.

Truthfully, there is no singular metric for measuring one university's academics over another, and even that doesn't take into account that some universities have different missions.

USFFan

(07-02-2019 11:38 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(07-02-2019 09:31 AM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  

(07-02-2019 08:21 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(07-02-2019 07:49 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-02-2019 07:11 AM)orangefan Wrote:  Some general observations.

When the Bowl Coalition began play in 1992, there were seven power conferences (conferences whose champions received automatic bids to a major bowl) consisting of 66 schools. Today, there are five power conferences consisting of 64 total schools.

Over that period, while there has obviously been a massive game of musical chairs, that's a net reduction of two schools.

Four schools in power conferences at the start of the Bowl Coalition are no longer members of a P5 conference - Houston, SMU, Rice and Temple. Only two schools that were not part of a power conference are now members of a P5 conference - Louisville and Utah.

Utah was the state flagship university from the largest states that did not have a power school at that time. That is a status that no school not already with that qualification can obtain. Basically, only three schools, UConn, Nevada and New Mexico, are flagships in states that are larger than the smallest states that already have a P5 school - West Virginia and Nebraska.

Louisville benefited from its location in a city that is near major league in size but with no major league franchises (it is a larger TV market than Buffalo, Memphis or New Orleans), being in a state with only one other power school, and having a willingness to spend extraordinary amounts on coaches and facilities (its football and basketball venues are NFL and NBA quality venues in which it is the only major tenant).

Bottom line - this club is more exclusive than Augusta National. Good luck to all, but don't hold your breath.

Utah also had the extraordinary political muscle of Orrin Hatch waiving his sabre at the BCS for five years behind them, and of course Louisville is still in the G5 if Maryland hadn't left the ACC for the B1G.

IMO, if any current G5 is in a P5 in the next 10 years, it will only come as "backfill", the way Louisville got the ACC bid. Close to zero chance that any P5 would pro-actively "expand" with any current G5.

We all know this, which is why fans of schools stuck in the G5 are always hopefully speculating about Big 12 implosion or PAC implosion or ACC implosion - whichever looks most likely at the time. Because only that kind of thing can give our school an opportunity.

One more thought - UConn is probably the most similar P5 candidate to either Utah or Louisville, and it just gave up.

I think Cincy, Houston, and Memphis have more in common with Louisville than UConn.

No doubt they all have various similarities. The three schools you identify are all "Urban Research" universities very similar in mission to UL. I cited three factors that supported UL's success in reaching P5 status:

Market:
Louisville: #49 tv market, no pro teams
Hartford: #32, no pro teams
Houston: #7, NFL, MLB and NBA franchises
Cincinnati: #35, NFL and MLB franchises
Memphis: #50, NBA franchise

Other P5 programs in the state:
Kentucky: One
Connecticut: None
Texas: Five
Ohio: One
Tennessee: Two

Venues:
Louisville: Football: 61,000 (1998), Basketball: 22,000 (2010)
UConn: Football: 40,000 (2002), Basketball: 16,000 (Excel Center, 1975)
Houston: Football: 40,000 (2014), Basketball: 7,000 (2018 renovations)
Cincinnati: Football: 40,000 (1915, renovated 2015), Basketball: 12,000 (1989)
Memphis: Football: 58,000 (1965), Basketball: 18,000 (2004)

I will add one factor in which UL does not perform well, but is extremely important to P5 conferences:

USNWR Ranking:
Louisville: #171
UConn: #63
Houston: #171
Cincinnati: #147
Memphis: #230-301

UL received an invitation despite this relatively poor ranking, especially for the ACC, which has no other school outside the top 80.

Another FACTOR which has played into the many many many considerations for advancing into P5 status has been the count of LIVING ALUMNI that a school has.

(07-02-2019 10:56 PM)seaking4steel Wrote:  Here's the best way to obtain P5 membership. I call it "The Louisville Method"

1. Be located in or near a large media market.

2. Get a sugar daddy donor to pay for new facilities.

3. Hire coaches that will trade in ethics and discipline for on field success and shady but successful recruiting practices.

4. Sit back and watch your school's success increase their stock. Your school may move to another higher prestige conference at this point.

5. Accept invite to a Power 5 conference when it is finally offered.

6. When your school's shady tactics are uncovered, simply fire the old coaches and administrators responsible. You may have lost your most successful coaches and might deal with punishments, but that sweet Power 5 conference membership won't be stripped from you!

#7.Politicians helped you get into a P5. (Baylor, Utah)

What we need is the PAC to get its **** together so by Texahoma leaving time it’s a viable home for those 4.

Then maybe the B1G and SEC are pressured to get to 16 and try to poach around the ACC’s GOR.

We end up with 4 16-18 team conferences and there’s a scramble for a 5th “best of the rest” conference.

Maximum realignment news cycle.

(07-04-2019 02:04 PM)zoocrew Wrote:  What we need is the PAC to get its **** together so by Texahoma leaving time it’s a viable home for those 4.

Then maybe the B1G and SEC are pressured to get to 16 and try to poach around the ACC’s GOR.

We end up with 4 16-18 team conferences and there’s a scramble for a 5th “best of the rest” conference.

Maximum realignment news cycle.

Not possible to “poach around a Grant of Rights”
Just let The SEC and Big Ten invite who they want from The Big 12.
The ACC and PAC can look at the leftovers.
I doubt either would find any value in the leftovers.

The ACC could invite WVU but I doubt they would have conference wide support.