(02-27-2021 10:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-19-2020 08:55 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-19-2020 02:19 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Academics definitely matter in conference realignment, especially to the Power Five conferences that have a real choice in their members. However, it's really a matter of ensuring that the academics clear a certain bar. After a school clears that bar, then it's about what that school brings to the table from an athletic perspective (whether it's performance on the field, a large TV market, a key recruiting area, etc.).

Thing is, though, the bar can go up or down depending on circumstances. E.g., probably no conference is as academically sensitive as the ACC, but in 2012 the ACC invited Louisville, who had bad academics at the time, because circumstances made them desperate to add a good football team.

Oklahoma/Big 10??? Where the rubber meets the road on academic qualifications trumping potential revenue!

With Nebraska, the B1G proved it was willing to go lower academically to grab a big football brand, so Oklahoma's academics should prove no barrier at all to them should the situation arise. Oklahoma's atcademics aren't great, but aren't terrible either.

(02-27-2021 11:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-27-2021 11:11 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(02-27-2021 10:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-27-2021 09:29 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  Back when all the shuffling was happening with the ACC, Big East, Big Ten and American, our family was discussing the "academic ramifications" of those movements.

As I have previously posted, my sister holds degrees from North Carolina and N.C. State; my brother, from Indiana and Cincinnati; and my sister-in-law (my brother's wife), from Louisville.

Based strictly on academics related to league affiliations, my brother was very pleased to see the Big Ten add Rutgers and Maryland and reasonably OK with Cincy being in the American; his wife was thrilled to have Louisville heading to the Atlantic Coast; and my sister preferred Cincinnati, UConn or South Florida for the ACC instead of Louisville.

And in case you are curious, all three are highly more knowledgeable about academia and more academically decorated than this schmoe.

Let me guess, if your family became a movie you would be played by Christopher Walken? or is it Charles Martin Smith? Which type of schmoe?

C. Walken is outstanding in The Deer Hunter. Hard to believe he's now 77. I suppose I would call myself an eccentric schmoe (though that seems contradictory).

Okay, Paul Giamatti it is!

Paul G. is one of my favorites. His character in Shoot Em Up ... beautiful.

(02-28-2021 09:37 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-27-2021 10:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-19-2020 08:55 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-19-2020 02:19 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Academics definitely matter in conference realignment, especially to the Power Five conferences that have a real choice in their members. However, it's really a matter of ensuring that the academics clear a certain bar. After a school clears that bar, then it's about what that school brings to the table from an athletic perspective (whether it's performance on the field, a large TV market, a key recruiting area, etc.).

Thing is, though, the bar can go up or down depending on circumstances. E.g., probably no conference is as academically sensitive as the ACC, but in 2012 the ACC invited Louisville, who had bad academics at the time, because circumstances made them desperate to add a good football team.

Oklahoma/Big 10??? Where the rubber meets the road on academic qualifications trumping potential revenue!

With Nebraska, the B1G proved it was willing to go lower academically to grab a big football brand, so Oklahoma's academics should prove no barrier at all to them should the situation arise. Oklahoma's atcademics aren't great, but aren't terrible either.

The AAU could be an issue. There was talk that Nebraska was going to be booted from the AAU but they were AAU at the time of the vote. Also important was at the time the Big Ten needed a 12th game for a conference championship game and at that time three of the major conferences (SEC, Big 12, and ACC) already had them. The Big Ten doesn't need an extra member now for a conference championship and would need a 16th member to go along with Oklahoma. Unless Texas is willing to go along, Kansas (even though they are AAU) isn't going to make the Big Ten rush to add Oklahoma (unless the broadcast partners really give the B1G enough money to make it worthwhile to add two extra members). If Oklahoma insists on Oklahoma State coming along, they're not coming to the Big Ten for sure.

(02-28-2021 12:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(02-28-2021 09:37 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-27-2021 10:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-19-2020 08:55 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-19-2020 02:19 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Academics definitely matter in conference realignment, especially to the Power Five conferences that have a real choice in their members. However, it's really a matter of ensuring that the academics clear a certain bar. After a school clears that bar, then it's about what that school brings to the table from an athletic perspective (whether it's performance on the field, a large TV market, a key recruiting area, etc.).

Thing is, though, the bar can go up or down depending on circumstances. E.g., probably no conference is as academically sensitive as the ACC, but in 2012 the ACC invited Louisville, who had bad academics at the time, because circumstances made them desperate to add a good football team.

Oklahoma/Big 10??? Where the rubber meets the road on academic qualifications trumping potential revenue!

With Nebraska, the B1G proved it was willing to go lower academically to grab a big football brand, so Oklahoma's academics should prove no barrier at all to them should the situation arise. Oklahoma's atcademics aren't great, but aren't terrible either.

The AAU could be an issue. There was talk that Nebraska was going to be booted from the AAU but they were AAU at the time of the vote. Also important was at the time the Big Ten needed a 12th game for a conference championship game and at that time three of the major conferences (SEC, Big 12, and ACC) already had them. The Big Ten doesn't need an extra member now for a conference championship and would need a 16th member to go along with Oklahoma. Unless Texas is willing to go along, Kansas (even though they are AAU) isn't going to make the Big Ten rush to add Oklahoma (unless the broadcast partners really give the B1G enough money to make it worthwhile to add two extra members). If Oklahoma insists on Oklahoma State coming along, they're not coming to the Big Ten for sure.

The Big Ten presidents/chancellors were voting Nebraska into the conference at the same time as voting them out of the AAU.

(02-28-2021 01:13 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  

(02-28-2021 12:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(02-28-2021 09:37 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-27-2021 10:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-19-2020 08:55 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Thing is, though, the bar can go up or down depending on circumstances. E.g., probably no conference is as academically sensitive as the ACC, but in 2012 the ACC invited Louisville, who had bad academics at the time, because circumstances made them desperate to add a good football team.

Oklahoma/Big 10??? Where the rubber meets the road on academic qualifications trumping potential revenue!

With Nebraska, the B1G proved it was willing to go lower academically to grab a big football brand, so Oklahoma's academics should prove no barrier at all to them should the situation arise. Oklahoma's atcademics aren't great, but aren't terrible either.

The AAU could be an issue. There was talk that Nebraska was going to be booted from the AAU but they were AAU at the time of the vote. Also important was at the time the Big Ten needed a 12th game for a conference championship game and at that time three of the major conferences (SEC, Big 12, and ACC) already had them. The Big Ten doesn't need an extra member now for a conference championship and would need a 16th member to go along with Oklahoma. Unless Texas is willing to go along, Kansas (even though they are AAU) isn't going to make the Big Ten rush to add Oklahoma (unless the broadcast partners really give the B1G enough money to make it worthwhile to add two extra members). If Oklahoma insists on Oklahoma State coming along, they're not coming to the Big Ten for sure.

The Big Ten presidents/chancellors were voting Nebraska into the conference at the same time as voting them out of the AAU.

Right. They also skipped right over another past, present, and future AAU member, Missouri, who checks a whole bunch of BIG boxes other than the $$$ and football tradition of Nebraska. All things being equal, AAU membership is icing, not cake.

The US News rankings matter insofar as they play a small role in driving undergraduate applications. State lawmakers and administrators care about these metrics, and will try to game their resources to help their schools climb the rankings. Florida is a good example of this.

Academics often matter in college athletics and conference realignment.

The US News rankings matter VERY little when it comes to college sports and conference membership. Those are not the academic benchmarks used when evaluating conference criteria.

(02-28-2021 11:38 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(02-27-2021 11:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-27-2021 11:11 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(02-27-2021 10:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-27-2021 09:29 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  Back when all the shuffling was happening with the ACC, Big East, Big Ten and American, our family was discussing the "academic ramifications" of those movements.

As I have previously posted, my sister holds degrees from North Carolina and N.C. State; my brother, from Indiana and Cincinnati; and my sister-in-law (my brother's wife), from Louisville.

Based strictly on academics related to league affiliations, my brother was very pleased to see the Big Ten add Rutgers and Maryland and reasonably OK with Cincy being in the American; his wife was thrilled to have Louisville heading to the Atlantic Coast; and my sister preferred Cincinnati, UConn or South Florida for the ACC instead of Louisville.

And in case you are curious, all three are highly more knowledgeable about academia and more academically decorated than this schmoe.

Let me guess, if your family became a movie you would be played by Christopher Walken? or is it Charles Martin Smith? Which type of schmoe?

C. Walken is outstanding in The Deer Hunter. Hard to believe he's now 77. I suppose I would call myself an eccentric schmoe (though that seems contradictory).

Okay, Paul Giamatti it is!

Paul G. is one of my favorites. His character in Shoot Em Up ... beautiful.

I liked him in Sideways and Cinderella Man. He is an eccentric schmoe on camera.

(02-28-2021 12:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(02-28-2021 09:37 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-27-2021 10:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-19-2020 08:55 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-19-2020 02:19 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Academics definitely matter in conference realignment, especially to the Power Five conferences that have a real choice in their members. However, it's really a matter of ensuring that the academics clear a certain bar. After a school clears that bar, then it's about what that school brings to the table from an athletic perspective (whether it's performance on the field, a large TV market, a key recruiting area, etc.).

Thing is, though, the bar can go up or down depending on circumstances. E.g., probably no conference is as academically sensitive as the ACC, but in 2012 the ACC invited Louisville, who had bad academics at the time, because circumstances made them desperate to add a good football team.

Oklahoma/Big 10??? Where the rubber meets the road on academic qualifications trumping potential revenue!

With Nebraska, the B1G proved it was willing to go lower academically to grab a big football brand, so Oklahoma's academics should prove no barrier at all to them should the situation arise. Oklahoma's atcademics aren't great, but aren't terrible either.

The AAU could be an issue. There was talk that Nebraska was going to be booted from the AAU but they were AAU at the time of the vote. Also important was at the time the Big Ten needed a 12th game for a conference championship game and at that time three of the major conferences (SEC, Big 12, and ACC) already had them. The Big Ten doesn't need an extra member now for a conference championship and would need a 16th member to go along with Oklahoma. Unless Texas is willing to go along, Kansas (even though they are AAU) isn't going to make the Big Ten rush to add Oklahoma (unless the broadcast partners really give the B1G enough money to make it worthwhile to add two extra members). If Oklahoma insists on Oklahoma State coming along, they're not coming to the Big Ten for sure.

Oklahoma is a true elite football blue blood. IMO the B1G or SEC would add them in a heartbeat even with an OK State tagalong.

(02-28-2021 08:45 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-28-2021 12:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(02-28-2021 09:37 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-27-2021 10:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-19-2020 08:55 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Thing is, though, the bar can go up or down depending on circumstances. E.g., probably no conference is as academically sensitive as the ACC, but in 2012 the ACC invited Louisville, who had bad academics at the time, because circumstances made them desperate to add a good football team.

Oklahoma/Big 10??? Where the rubber meets the road on academic qualifications trumping potential revenue!

With Nebraska, the B1G proved it was willing to go lower academically to grab a big football brand, so Oklahoma's academics should prove no barrier at all to them should the situation arise. Oklahoma's atcademics aren't great, but aren't terrible either.

The AAU could be an issue. There was talk that Nebraska was going to be booted from the AAU but they were AAU at the time of the vote. Also important was at the time the Big Ten needed a 12th game for a conference championship game and at that time three of the major conferences (SEC, Big 12, and ACC) already had them. The Big Ten doesn't need an extra member now for a conference championship and would need a 16th member to go along with Oklahoma. Unless Texas is willing to go along, Kansas (even though they are AAU) isn't going to make the Big Ten rush to add Oklahoma (unless the broadcast partners really give the B1G enough money to make it worthwhile to add two extra members). If Oklahoma insists on Oklahoma State coming along, they're not coming to the Big Ten for sure.

Oklahoma is a true elite football blue blood. IMO the B1G or SEC would add them in a heartbeat even with an OK State tagalong.

I don't believe that's quite true Quo. I feel the SEC would make an accommodation if they had to, but I don't believe the Big 10 would. I think their accommodation is in taking Oklahoma for the revenue boost they would bring. I don't see them ever taking the Pokes. They would come nearer to taking Texas Tech to get Texas than they would taking Oklahoma State to get Oklahoma. The academic side is more of a sticking point and the elasticity on that standard would be stretched just with the Sooners.

(02-28-2021 04:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-28-2021 11:38 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(02-27-2021 11:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-27-2021 11:11 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(02-27-2021 10:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Let me guess, if your family became a movie you would be played by Christopher Walken? or is it Charles Martin Smith? Which type of schmoe?

C. Walken is outstanding in The Deer Hunter. Hard to believe he's now 77. I suppose I would call myself an eccentric schmoe (though that seems contradictory).

Okay, Paul Giamatti it is!

Paul G. is one of my favorites. His character in Shoot Em Up ... beautiful.

I liked him in Sideways and Cinderella Man. He is an eccentric schmoe on camera.

Those are two very good movies and Giamatti is strong in both. I liked his effete character in Sideways.

(02-28-2021 08:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-28-2021 08:45 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-28-2021 12:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(02-28-2021 09:37 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-27-2021 10:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Oklahoma/Big 10??? Where the rubber meets the road on academic qualifications trumping potential revenue!

With Nebraska, the B1G proved it was willing to go lower academically to grab a big football brand, so Oklahoma's academics should prove no barrier at all to them should the situation arise. Oklahoma's atcademics aren't great, but aren't terrible either.

The AAU could be an issue. There was talk that Nebraska was going to be booted from the AAU but they were AAU at the time of the vote. Also important was at the time the Big Ten needed a 12th game for a conference championship game and at that time three of the major conferences (SEC, Big 12, and ACC) already had them. The Big Ten doesn't need an extra member now for a conference championship and would need a 16th member to go along with Oklahoma. Unless Texas is willing to go along, Kansas (even though they are AAU) isn't going to make the Big Ten rush to add Oklahoma (unless the broadcast partners really give the B1G enough money to make it worthwhile to add two extra members). If Oklahoma insists on Oklahoma State coming along, they're not coming to the Big Ten for sure.

Oklahoma is a true elite football blue blood. IMO the B1G or SEC would add them in a heartbeat even with an OK State tagalong.

I don't believe that's quite true Quo. I feel the SEC would make an accommodation if they had to, but I don't believe the Big 10 would. I think their accommodation is in taking Oklahoma for the revenue boost they would bring. I don't see them ever taking the Pokes. They would come nearer to taking Texas Tech to get Texas than they would taking Oklahoma State to get Oklahoma. The academic side is more of a sticking point and the elasticity on that standard would be stretched just with the Sooners.

IMHO, I don't think either the Big Ten or SEC would take Oklahoma State or Texas Tech. We can dress it up as academics or revenue sharing, but both of those leagues have enough power and revenue where taking a "little brother" that doesn't bring sufficient value in and of itself just to get another member (even Texas) is simply untenable at this point with them already being at 14 members. (Note that Texas A&M had a lot of value in and of itself despite Texas being the flagship in the state, which the SEC rightly saw.) That being said, I agree and absolutely 100% believe that the Big Ten would take Oklahoma *alone*. They meet the "academically good enough" standard for the league regardless of AAU status.

(03-01-2021 09:28 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-28-2021 08:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-28-2021 08:45 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-28-2021 12:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(02-28-2021 09:37 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  With Nebraska, the B1G proved it was willing to go lower academically to grab a big football brand, so Oklahoma's academics should prove no barrier at all to them should the situation arise. Oklahoma's atcademics aren't great, but aren't terrible either.

The AAU could be an issue. There was talk that Nebraska was going to be booted from the AAU but they were AAU at the time of the vote. Also important was at the time the Big Ten needed a 12th game for a conference championship game and at that time three of the major conferences (SEC, Big 12, and ACC) already had them. The Big Ten doesn't need an extra member now for a conference championship and would need a 16th member to go along with Oklahoma. Unless Texas is willing to go along, Kansas (even though they are AAU) isn't going to make the Big Ten rush to add Oklahoma (unless the broadcast partners really give the B1G enough money to make it worthwhile to add two extra members). If Oklahoma insists on Oklahoma State coming along, they're not coming to the Big Ten for sure.

Oklahoma is a true elite football blue blood. IMO the B1G or SEC would add them in a heartbeat even with an OK State tagalong.

I don't believe that's quite true Quo. I feel the SEC would make an accommodation if they had to, but I don't believe the Big 10 would. I think their accommodation is in taking Oklahoma for the revenue boost they would bring. I don't see them ever taking the Pokes. They would come nearer to taking Texas Tech to get Texas than they would taking Oklahoma State to get Oklahoma. The academic side is more of a sticking point and the elasticity on that standard would be stretched just with the Sooners.

IMHO, I don't think either the Big Ten or SEC would take Oklahoma State or Texas Tech. We can dress it up as academics or revenue sharing, but both of those leagues have enough power and revenue where taking a "little brother" that doesn't bring sufficient value in and of itself just to get another member (even Texas) is simply untenable at this point with them already being at 14 members. (Note that Texas A&M had a lot of value in and of itself despite Texas being the flagship in the state, which the SEC rightly saw.) That being said, I agree and absolutely 100% believe that the Big Ten would take Oklahoma *alone*. They meet the "academically good enough" standard for the league regardless of AAU status.

You certainly could be correct about this Frank, but perhaps for another reason as well. It is quite possible, though they would never publicly admit it, that Texas would take the opportunity to move on its own without the demand of another state school simply to distance itself in branding within the state. I don't say this implying that Texas is worried about their branding as a rule, but a little more distinguishing from the myriad of other Texas schools would continue to work to their advantage and playing more brands also enhances their already immense value. In either the SEC or Big 10 Texas and A&M set themselves apart even more relative to all other Texas schools.

As Boomers pass as a driving sports loving force this kind of distinction's benefit will become more obvious. But simply by the numbers Texas and any buddy still exceed the means even on the SEC's metrics. Obviously Texas and another valuable school together would be much more preferable, but Texas and another would still be profitable, just not nearly as much. Oklahoma and another is more of a stretch. I think the obvious move remains the one the SEC desires. UT and OU together moves Alabama and Auburn East and Missouri West and likely eliminates protected crossovers.

(02-28-2021 08:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-28-2021 08:45 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-28-2021 12:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(02-28-2021 09:37 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-27-2021 10:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Oklahoma/Big 10??? Where the rubber meets the road on academic qualifications trumping potential revenue!

With Nebraska, the B1G proved it was willing to go lower academically to grab a big football brand, so Oklahoma's academics should prove no barrier at all to them should the situation arise. Oklahoma's atcademics aren't great, but aren't terrible either.

The AAU could be an issue. There was talk that Nebraska was going to be booted from the AAU but they were AAU at the time of the vote. Also important was at the time the Big Ten needed a 12th game for a conference championship game and at that time three of the major conferences (SEC, Big 12, and ACC) already had them. The Big Ten doesn't need an extra member now for a conference championship and would need a 16th member to go along with Oklahoma. Unless Texas is willing to go along, Kansas (even though they are AAU) isn't going to make the Big Ten rush to add Oklahoma (unless the broadcast partners really give the B1G enough money to make it worthwhile to add two extra members). If Oklahoma insists on Oklahoma State coming along, they're not coming to the Big Ten for sure.

Oklahoma is a true elite football blue blood. IMO the B1G or SEC would add them in a heartbeat even with an OK State tagalong.

I don't believe that's quite true Quo. I feel the SEC would make an accommodation if they had to, but I don't believe the Big 10 would. I think their accommodation is in taking Oklahoma for the revenue boost they would bring. I don't see them ever taking the Pokes. They would come nearer to taking Texas Tech to get Texas than they would taking Oklahoma State to get Oklahoma. The academic side is more of a sticking point and the elasticity on that standard would be stretched just with the Sooners.

Well yeah, because Texas is even more valuable than Oklahoma.

On the larger point though I guess we may never know. My belief about OK is that they are so valuable for football that even the B1G would take them in a minute even with the Pokes. But hey, I've been wrong before.