(10-29-2020 02:27 PM)XLance Wrote:  It appears as if the B1G is preventing Nebraska from scheduling a replacement game for this weekend (Chattanooga).
With a strained relationship between Nebraska and the B1G, should Nebraska contemplate a return to the Big 12 if ESPN guaranteed some compensation to help ease the discrepancy in conference payouts?
Perhaps Nebraska could pair with Missouri or Colorado in a return home.

In my opinion there is no chance this will ever happen. Thanks to the UT domination in the Big 12.

(10-29-2020 12:00 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  UT's preferred realignment options (ellipsis indicates large gap between options in terms of UT desirability)

Big 12 as is (with OU)
...
FB independence with non-FB sports in Big 12 (if OU has left the Big 12)
...
Pac-16 with OU, TT, and OSU
SEC with OU, TT, and TCU
SEC with OU, TT, and OSU
SEC with OU/TT
...
Big Ten with OU
Big Ten with KU
...
ACC with no Big 12 buddies, even with an ND-style deal

The options for UT are much more diverse. My opinions of some possibilities, in terms of desirability:

1) B12 as is (with OU and an acceptable media renewal)
....
2a) FB independence with non-FB sports in B12 (if OU is out and B12 media renewal is problematic)
2b) SEC with TTU (if OU is out, B12 media renewal is problematic and SEC makes overtures)
2c) Merger with best brands from PAC & B12 (if OU remains partnered but media renewal is problematic for both B12 & PAC; requires proper allocation of schools from each conference)
...
3a) ACC expansion with OU and multiple tag-alongs (assumes B12 media renewal goes badly and ACC offer on tag-alongs is preferable to SEC offer)
3b) ACC expansion with TTU and TCU (if OU is out and B12 media renewal is problematic, and FB independence is too risky for non-revenue sports)
...
4) SEC with just OU
...
5) BIG with just OU
...
Countless other scenarios


UT has many options. By playing the field in 2010, they have made their options known to media partners and other conferences.

(10-29-2020 02:51 PM)SMUstang Wrote:  

(10-29-2020 02:27 PM)XLance Wrote:  It appears as if the B1G is preventing Nebraska from scheduling a replacement game for this weekend (Chattanooga).
With a strained relationship between Nebraska and the B1G, should Nebraska contemplate a return to the Big 12 if ESPN guaranteed some compensation to help ease the discrepancy in conference payouts?
Perhaps Nebraska could pair with Missouri or Colorado in a return home.

In my opinion there is no chance this will ever happen. Thanks to the UT domination in the Big 12.

Nebraska wouldn't come home, even with Colorado, because Texas is worse than Ohio State and Michigan? I don't see Texas keeping the other Big 12 teams from playing football and trying to make a living. Some schools don't have the luxury to rely on huge endowments to fall back on to pay the bills when times are tough.

(10-29-2020 04:06 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(10-29-2020 12:00 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  UT's preferred realignment options (ellipsis indicates large gap between options in terms of UT desirability)

Big 12 as is (with OU)
...
FB independence with non-FB sports in Big 12 (if OU has left the Big 12)
...
Pac-16 with OU, TT, and OSU
SEC with OU, TT, and TCU
SEC with OU, TT, and OSU
SEC with OU/TT
...
Big Ten with OU
Big Ten with KU
...
ACC with no Big 12 buddies, even with an ND-style deal

The options for UT are much more diverse. My opinions of some possibilities, in terms of desirability:

1) B12 as is (with OU and an acceptable media renewal)
....
2a) FB independence with non-FB sports in B12 (if OU is out and B12 media renewal is problematic)
2b) SEC with TTU (if OU is out, B12 media renewal is problematic and SEC makes overtures)
2c) Merger with best brands from PAC & B12 (if OU remains partnered but media renewal is problematic for both B12 & PAC; requires proper allocation of schools from each conference)
...
3a) ACC expansion with OU and multiple tag-alongs (assumes B12 media renewal goes badly and ACC offer on tag-alongs is preferable to SEC offer)
3b) ACC expansion with TTU and TCU (if OU is out and B12 media renewal is problematic, and FB independence is too risky for non-revenue sports)
...
4) SEC with just OU
...
5) BIG with just OU
...
Countless other scenarios


UT has many options. By playing the field in 2010, they have made their options known to media partners and other conferences.

Right, I was just posting the realistic ones, although the ACC option barely qualifies. A "best of the Pac-12 and Big 12" conference is fantasy.

(10-27-2020 09:26 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(10-27-2020 04:20 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(10-27-2020 04:08 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  Many of the G5 programs wanting to be invited to a P5 league offers multiple positives. But only a few offer basically everything (fans, market, on-campus facilities, academics, a long history of playing NCAA Division I-A sports, strong endowments, competitive athletics department budgets and a quality one-two punch in football and men's basketball).

BYU is at the top of the list and I feel most of us (if not all) agree. In the next tier are, in no particular order, Cincinnati, Houston and UConn. After those four ... it gets tricky.

My gut feeling is that we will not see any changes to the P5 for many years. If not, and if the intact American is forced to add a program, that could create a ripple effect within the G5. The most seamless scenario and one that would minimally harm other leagues (but it won't happen) is the AAC adds either BYU or Army for football only and, say, VCU (from the A10) for all sports but football. If this were to happen and the A10 were to replace VCU by inviting Belmont as a replacement, this long-time Bruins fan — in an excited manner — would wear sport a Mo Howard haircut for the next five years. Having Belmont in the A10 would be huge for Belmont and for Nashville.

I have to disagree about UConn. That football has severely deteriorated since the Big East-AAC split occurred.

2024 is likely the big year for alignment. GORs are up for both the Big 12 and PAC 12. If it doesn’t happen then, strap in and wait until 2037.

If the NCAA won’t let the AAC play a CCG with 11 members indefinitely, then yes, BYU or Army as a fb affiliate would be ideal. Alternatively, BYU, Boise St, and AFA as a package deal would be a nice pick up. I don’t like they hybrid model though—not a fan of bringing in schools that only contribute in basketball.

Agree that UConn football is a weak element in the overall list of characteristics I offer. But the university and its athletic program overall bring most of those positives to the table.

I would prefer, if the AAC, is required to add, an all-sports member. But there does not seem to be a program that is sufficiently good in both football and men's hoops — or one that is nationally strong in one of the sports and at least solid in the other. UAB is probably the best option in terms of the football-hoops combo. But that does not necessarily mean UAB would be the best choice overall. Hard to say.

The only question mark with UAB is the thing that caused them to cancel football a few seasons ago: they are not the masters of their own destiny. As long as the AAC doesn’t mind they are clearly the best add. Or they wait for Georgia State.

(10-27-2020 04:58 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Memphis has the money, the backers, but academics DQed them from the B12 Rose ceremony a few years ago, and I don't think anything has changed on that front.

Considering how things have been in the past, we've definitely made improvements though there's still a long ways to go. Memphis has gone from unranked to #258 over the past few years in the USNews ranking. For the first time ever made the 2021 Times Higher Education World University Rankings coming in at 801-1000 in World and 156 in US. Lastly they have been working on getting the university from R2 to R1 status. Even if these show no results football-wise, the school will be much better off.

Nebraska is going to wait until they find out whether the Big Ten will be able to pull in an Oklahoma at the very least. So they're staying put for the time being. Only if it's clear that they're not reuniting with an old rival that they might consider their options.

There is no short list. As for Nebraska, they are not going back to B12. Simple math equation 50mil>25 mil.

(10-29-2020 09:19 PM)Alanda Wrote:  

(10-27-2020 04:58 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Memphis has the money, the backers, but academics DQed them from the B12 Rose ceremony a few years ago, and I don't think anything has changed on that front.

Considering how things have been in the past, we've definitely made improvements though there's still a long ways to go. Memphis has gone from unranked to #258 over the past few years in the USNews ranking. For the first time ever made the 2021 Times Higher Education World University Rankings coming in at 801-1000 in World and 156 in US. Lastly they have been working on getting the university from R2 to R1 status. Even if these show no results football-wise, the school will be much better off.

Memphis, like all universities, has strong points and weak points. My sense from being in academia is that academically Memphis has definitely improved over the past 15 years. It's a good school, better than the national reputation.

If anything, I think the athletic reputation, especially the troubles with the hoops program, hurt the academic reputation. Memphis, kind of like Louisville, has a reputation for being more aggressive and ambitious about athletics than academics, and I think this unfairly colors the academic view of the school.

(10-30-2020 06:31 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  There is no short list. As for Nebraska, they are not going back to B12. Simple math equation 50mil>25 mil.

If there is no short list.....then we have come full circle to a point where we are trying to find homes for the "value" schools of the Big 12, because as a conference they can't survive?

(10-29-2020 09:19 PM)Alanda Wrote:  

(10-27-2020 04:58 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Memphis has the money, the backers, but academics DQed them from the B12 Rose ceremony a few years ago, and I don't think anything has changed on that front.

Considering how things have been in the past, we've definitely made improvements though there's still a long ways to go. Memphis has gone from unranked to #258 over the past few years in the USNews ranking. For the first time ever made the 2021 Times Higher Education World University Rankings coming in at 801-1000 in World and 156 in US. Lastly they have been working on getting the university from R2 to R1 status. Even if these show no results football-wise, the school will be much better off.

Getting the law school and, to a lesser extent, the architecture program, have been helpful. Lots of progress has been made but, as you note, there remains much work to be done.

I've always wondered if outsiders' views of the university are sometimes "clouded" by those same outsiders' opinions of the city of Memphis more broadly.

I have followed Memphis, Cincinnati and Louisville (the cities, the universities and the athletics programs) since the 1970s and there are multiple comparisons and contrasts. It is a fascinating dynamic.

(10-30-2020 07:23 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(10-30-2020 06:31 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  There is no short list. As for Nebraska, they are not going back to B12. Simple math equation 50mil>25 mil.

If there is no short list.....then we have come full circle to a point where we are trying to find homes for the "value" schools of the Big 12, because as a conference they can't survive?

Well, not in any real-world sense. I mean, that conference probably isn't much influenced by what alignment-pontificators on this forum think, LOL.

(10-30-2020 06:31 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  There is no short list. As for Nebraska, they are not going back to B12. Simple math equation 50mil>25 mil.

I agree with that logic - but up to a point. Yes, it's an extreme point, but there is also a breaking point with it as well. I mean, what would you do by way of humiliating yourself for money? Me? Quite a bit, LOL. But at a certain point our pride and dignity is greater than our lust for money, so we would only go so far.

Point is - there is a breaking point, a point where a school can be pushed too far, even if they are being paid very well to be pushed.

(10-30-2020 06:31 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  There is no short list. As for Nebraska, they are not going back to B12. Simple math equation 50mil>25 mil.

I'm fairly certain that Big 12 schools are making at least 40 mil a piece for it's tier 1 and 2 deals.. How much more money could NE make selling it's tier 3 rights? Who knows..

Bet the budget office in Boulder wishes it was getting Big12 money right now

(10-30-2020 02:07 PM)Thiefery Wrote:  

(10-30-2020 06:31 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  There is no short list. As for Nebraska, they are not going back to B12. Simple math equation 50mil>25 mil.

I'm fairly certain that Big 12 schools are making at least 40 mil a piece for it's tier 1 and 2 deals.. How much more money could NE make selling it's tier 3 rights? Who knows..

Bet the budget office in Boulder wishes it was getting Big12 money right now

There in lies the problem. Nebraska is making more money and doing less than Oklahoma.
There are some folks that think they are worth more than they are getting paid and the only way to get more is to leave the Big 12.

(10-30-2020 03:01 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(10-30-2020 02:07 PM)Thiefery Wrote:  

(10-30-2020 06:31 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  There is no short list. As for Nebraska, they are not going back to B12. Simple math equation 50mil>25 mil.

I'm fairly certain that Big 12 schools are making at least 40 mil a piece for it's tier 1 and 2 deals.. How much more money could NE make selling it's tier 3 rights? Who knows..

Bet the budget office in Boulder wishes it was getting Big12 money right now

There in lies the problem. Nebraska is making more money and doing less than Oklahoma.
There are some folks that think they are worth more than they are getting paid and the only way to get more is to leave the Big 12.

It's pretty crazy how MD and RU are getting the same amount of money as UM and tosu..

I think overtime, people will realize the Big12 was doing it right with having independent rights to it's tier 3.

(10-30-2020 05:36 PM)Thiefery Wrote:  I think overtime, people will realize the Big12 was doing it right with having independent rights to it's tier 3.

And by playing round-robin in both FB and BB. So maybe we can only take one?

(10-30-2020 09:53 PM)PlayBall! Wrote:  

(10-30-2020 05:36 PM)Thiefery Wrote:  I think overtime, people will realize the Big12 was doing it right with having independent rights to it's tier 3.

And by playing round-robin in both FB and BB. So maybe we can only take one?

I think if NE was really serious about returning, the conference would not add a 12th school. I think they go with 10 conference games, 2 OOC games.. one vs P5, other as it's personal choice.

Maybe that closes the gap in TV money having the extra conference game?

(10-30-2020 06:54 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-29-2020 09:19 PM)Alanda Wrote:  

(10-27-2020 04:58 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Memphis has the money, the backers, but academics DQed them from the B12 Rose ceremony a few years ago, and I don't think anything has changed on that front.

Considering how things have been in the past, we've definitely made improvements though there's still a long ways to go. Memphis has gone from unranked to #258 over the past few years in the USNews ranking. For the first time ever made the 2021 Times Higher Education World University Rankings coming in at 801-1000 in World and 156 in US. Lastly they have been working on getting the university from R2 to R1 status. Even if these show no results football-wise, the school will be much better off.

Memphis, like all universities, has strong points and weak points. My sense from being in academia is that academically Memphis has definitely improved over the past 15 years. It's a good school, better than the national reputation.

If anything, I think the athletic reputation, especially the troubles with the hoops program, hurt the academic reputation. Memphis, kind of like Louisville, has a reputation for being more aggressive and ambitious about athletics than academics, and I think this unfairly colors the academic view of the school.

I can agree with that. Some of my views might be different than other Tigers fans though. I was born in Arkansas and grew up as a Razorbacks fan. I only knew of Memphis State growing up from when Arkansas played them. I even went to Fayetteville for most of a semester before withdrawing. The next semester I went to UofMemphis which was Spring '97.

But it does feel like the school tried to get by more on athletics than academics. But it becomes even more of a problem when you are inconsistent on the athletics side. And it looks like it finally caught up with us. One thing that will help is that UofM got its own Board of Regents not long ago. Those that have followed the Tigers longer than I have wanted this change a long time ago.

(10-30-2020 08:24 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(10-29-2020 09:19 PM)Alanda Wrote:  

(10-27-2020 04:58 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Memphis has the money, the backers, but academics DQed them from the B12 Rose ceremony a few years ago, and I don't think anything has changed on that front.

Considering how things have been in the past, we've definitely made improvements though there's still a long ways to go. Memphis has gone from unranked to #258 over the past few years in the USNews ranking. For the first time ever made the 2021 Times Higher Education World University Rankings coming in at 801-1000 in World and 156 in US. Lastly they have been working on getting the university from R2 to R1 status. Even if these show no results football-wise, the school will be much better off.

Getting the law school and, to a lesser extent, the architecture program, have been helpful. Lots of progress has been made but, as you note, there remains much work to be done.

I've always wondered if outsiders' views of the university are sometimes "clouded" by those same outsiders' opinions of the city of Memphis more broadly.

I have followed Memphis, Cincinnati and Louisville (the cities, the universities and the athletics programs) since the 1970s and there are multiple comparisons and contrasts. It is a fascinating dynamic.

Yeah and getting the STEM building built will be key as well. To what you've wondered I would say yes. If the person only looks at the negatives of the city, they will just assume they apply to everything including UofM. And I would say that is a lazy assessment.