NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards

Discussions by Conference:
 
NCAA Map
  It is currently Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:26 am

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping
College T-shirts at Fanatics.com

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 104 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Aug 10, 2015 10:47 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 1806
There's only two schools outside of P5/ND that are averaging over 45,000 attendance figures over the last fifteen years. BYU is one of them at 60,235. The other is East Carolina at 47,092, and they have pulled in 50,000.
Some of these schools that are advocated for B12 expansion, are hardly averaging in the low 30K. Some of them are engaged in renovations, but that's going on at a lot of places, including some mega-stadiums and coliseums at existing P5 schools. A school that has a 32,000 or so seat fb stadium, and renovates to put in new box/luxury seats and adds 5,000 general seats are improving facilities, but that's hardly big-time in terms of venues. It's a question of who has the preferred fan bases, and who do not.

I can see why the B12 has no stand-out choices in terms of expansion. Some of the better ones, pose big problems in terms of geography and travel for low-budgeted sports.

If the B12 goes more with huge distances in expansion, at least find ones with fine airports and quality interstate highway accesses and not traveling to play before 28,000 fans in attendance, even if such a game is televised.

I've been to Morgantown, WV a few times. It's a beautiful area and an attractive campus. It's also a pain to get to and from. While they improved the local airport sometime back, it's not a hub, and still has limitations. There pattern has been to go to the north of Pittsburgh if flying, and drive 50+ miles south on winding roads. Going there in winter time have their moments of challenge. That is not a fault of WVU, the mountainous terrain is natural. This has been factored in before when other conferences considered WVU. It's odd because WVU is at the crossroads of the northeast/mid-west/Ohio Valley/mid-Atlantic/upper south.

I can understand WVU's issue also. Their fans would want at least one or two conference away games reasonably accessible for their RV and SUV fans. WVU is not a jet-set crowd.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 24, 2015 9:43 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 8571
Article out of Salt Lake with comments from BYU AD regarding conference situation and other topics at http://www.sltrib.com/sports/2856317-15 ... scheduling


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 24, 2015 1:30 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am
Posts: 1347
Location: Columbus, OH
freaked4collegefb wrote:
Article out of Salt Lake with comments from BYU AD regarding conference situation and other topics at http://www.sltrib.com/sports/2856317-15 ... scheduling" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


BYU articles with Tom Holmoe quotes always perplex me. He has previously stated that BYU needs a football conference to call home and that independence is not sustainable. Now he is stating that he is committed to BYU playing at the highest level in athletics but also that he will only accept a full sports invite. So are you saying that a football only invite to the Big 12 isn't good enough? Beggars can't be choosers Tom. The Big 12 isn't interested in flying women's tennis out to Provo. If they offer you a football only invite you had better take it. The WCC is a comfortable home for the rest of the department and they don't seem to mind the no Sunday play thing.

Then there is the thing with the MWC. No one at BYU will give a good answer to whether or not if independence fails if they will return to MWC. At this point BYU needs the MWC more than the MWC needs them. I can't believe that Holmoe believes that full MWC membership would be preferable to WCC membership and a football affiliate relationship with the Big 12.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 23, 2015 7:52 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 1806
Here's a summary of BYU's policy from their athletic website pertaining to Sunday play:

http://byucougars.com/athletics/athletics-faqs


["] "What is the Sunday play policy, or "BYU rule"?
NCAA rules state that if a university competing in an NCAA championship has a written policy against competition on a particular day for religious reasons, the championship schedule must be adjusted to accommodate that institution.* Brigham Young University has a written policy against Sunday play, and therefore will have schedules adjusted to play on Saturday or Monday, even if it involves changing televised or otherwise broadcast events.

In April 1998 the NCAA Division I Board of Directors struck controversy when it attempted to eliminate its long-standing policy that allowed for some flexibility with regard to Sunday play. Only BYU and Campbell University of North Carolina objected to the rescinding of the rule, which was left in place. The rule calls for teams to formally register their refusal to play on certain days with the NCAA before the season starts, and the NCAA must respect the no-play policy for Sundays.

*From the NCAA official website at
www.ncaa.org "


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 27, 2016 2:29 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:25 pm
Posts: 2151
BYU has bopped along as an independent for a few years now.

They've managed to put together an "OK" FBS schedule.
They have a TV deal that feeds them some OK money, better than most G5 teams get, far less than P5 teams receive.

BYU has been hoping to ultimately be invited to the PAC or Big XII.

Now that the Big XII can have a CCG without expanding, the Big XII will meet soon to see if there is any consensus regarding either CCG and/or expansion.
If they decide against expansion, it would appear BYU won't be receiving any P5 invitations in the foreseeable future.
If that is the case, would they begin a dialogue about re-joining the MWC ?
That might have to wait for the next administration /AD, who wouldn't have to "save face" about leaving the MWC and going independent...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 1:48 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 10:45 am
Posts: 331
I just took a look at BYU's football schedules over the next few years and...WOW. Power schools don't schedule non-power schedules are regularly as BYU gets scheduled. Just saying, but they are a power quality school and should probably be considered as such.

Example: Idaho's independent schedule in 2013 - North Texas, Wyoming, Northern Illinois, Washington St, Temple, Fresno St, Arkansas St, Ole Miss, Texas St, Old Dominion, Florida St, New Mexico St

Example: New Mexico St's independent schedule in 2013 - Texas, Minnesota, UTEP, UCLA, San Diego St, New Mexico, Rice, Abilene Christian, Louisiana-Lafayette, Boston College, Florida Atlantic, Idaho

Comparing these two - NMSU definitely had a tougher road to hoe, but let's look at BYU's scheduled opponents between 2016-2020...

2016 - Arizona, Utah, UCLA, West Virginia, Toledo, Michigan St, Mississippi St, Boise St, Cincinnati, Southern Utah, Massachusetts, Utah St
2017 - LSU, Utah, Wisconsin, Utah St, Boise St, Mississippi St, East Carolina, San Jose St, Fresno St, UNLV, Massachusetts, Hawaii
2018 - Arizona, California, Wisconsin, Washington, Utah St, Boise St, Northern Illinois, Massachusetts, Hawaii, Utah (2 open dates)
2019 - Utah, Virginia, USC, Washington, Toledo, Utah St, Washington St, Boise St, Massachusetts (3 open dates)
2020 - Utah, Michigan St, Arizona St, Utah St, Boise St, Northern Illinois, Missouri, Stanford (4 open dates)

I'm not totally convinced they should even join a conference given their ability to schedule strong. Even their G5 scheduling is fairly difficult.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 5:34 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am
Posts: 1347
Location: Columbus, OH
BYU seems to be able to pull off the independent scheduling just fine. Power 5 membership would be nicer. The only thing is that there is no good mechanism for them to make it to big New Years 6 games without an affiliation. Maybe in the next cycle someone will throw them a bone and make one for them especially if it seems like BYU is better than the Group of 5 representative.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 12:49 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:25 pm
Posts: 2151
BYU has an open invitation to come back to the MWC (or so it seems).

I don't think they'll consider that, until they are convinced there is no P5 conference invitation in their future (and nobody knows how that will play out, at this time).

I think BYU makes more TV money in their independent operation, than what they would get as part of their MWC share (although the MWC share is skewed toward the better football teams that are on TV more often, at the behest of Boise State).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2016 5:43 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 8571
Salt Lake Trib article discussing possibility of Big 12 voting on BYU membership later this year at http://www.sltrib.com/home/3853806-155/ ... swers-from


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 24, 2016 11:11 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 8571
Article out of Salt Lake suggesting that BYU apparently needs more "juice" in order to snag a Big 12 invite at http://www.sltrib.com/sports/3915864-15 ... benefactor


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 04, 2016 9:37 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 8571
Deseret News article discussing BYU/Big 12 situation after this week's Big 12 spring meetings at http://www.deseretnews.com/article/8656 ... tml?pg=all


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2016 11:28 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 1806
Allegedly, BYU was one of three final schools the B12 had narrowed down for expansion consideration.

BYU has all the ingredients for B12-level athletic competition, and would "add to", not dilute, the B12 product.

For now, the B12 could simply add BYU as #11, and that would not require divisions. The B1g 10 worked with 11 for years when they added Penn State. Then, the B12 could take their time in finding #12, and allow a few more years to find out who stands out going forward in terms of a new candidate.

While it adds to travel, and BYU brings with them some unique issues, it also taps into a broader market with a program that has been long-term successful in multiple sports, and with national name recognition.

Also, Houston does have some support within the B12; that could be the State of Texas-centered, but perhaps others liked them, such as WVU's Gee, when he visited the campus. While it is another Texas school, there's also a case for them athletically.

If Cincinnati was not viewed as a potential travel partner for WVU, I believe their prospect would diminish a bit.

Indicators were that the B12 was within one, maybe two, votes to agreeing on expansion. They were also divided as to which of primarily three candidates were most plausible.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2016 11:37 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am
Posts: 1347
Location: Columbus, OH
sec03 wrote:
Allegedly, BYU was one of three final schools the B12 had narrowed down for expansion consideration.

BYU has all the ingredients for B12-level athletic competition, and would "add to", not dilute, the B12 product.

For now, the B12 could simply add BYU as #11, and that would not require divisions. The B1g 10 worked with 11 for years when they added Penn State. Then, the B12 could take their time in finding #12, and allow a few more years to find out who stands out going forward in terms of a new candidate.

While it adds to travel, and BYU brings with them some unique issues, it also taps into a broader market with a program that has been long-term successful in multiple sports, and with national name recognition.

Also, Houston does have some support within the B12; that could be the State of Texas-centered, but perhaps others liked them, such as WVU's Gee, when he visited the campus. While it is another Texas school, there's also a case for them athletically.

If Cincinnati was not viewed as a potential travel partner for WVU, I believe their prospect would diminish a bit.

Indicators were that the B12 was within one, maybe two, votes to agreeing on expansion. They were also divided as to which of primarily three candidates were most plausible.


So are you saying that Cincy, BYU, and Houston were the three they were deciding among or were there others?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2016 2:20 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 1806
fighting muskie wrote:
sec03 wrote:
Allegedly, BYU was one of three final schools the B12 had narrowed down for expansion consideration.

BYU has all the ingredients for B12-level athletic competition, and would "add to", not dilute, the B12 product.

For now, the B12 could simply add BYU as #11, and that would not require divisions. The B1g 10 worked with 11 for years when they added Penn State. Then, the B12 could take their time in finding #12, and allow a few more years to find out who stands out going forward in terms of a new candidate.

While it adds to travel, and BYU brings with them some unique issues, it also taps into a broader market with a program that has been long-term successful in multiple sports, and with national name recognition.

Also, Houston does have some support within the B12; that could be the State of Texas-centered, but perhaps others liked them, such as WVU's Gee, when he visited the campus. While it is another Texas school, there's also a case for them athletically.

If Cincinnati was not viewed as a potential travel partner for WVU, I believe their prospect would diminish a bit.

Indicators were that the B12 was within one, maybe two, votes to agreeing on expansion. They were also divided as to which of primarily three candidates were most plausible.


So are you saying that Cincy, BYU, and Houston were the three they were deciding among or were there others?


Muskie,

I said allegedly, because it is not a confirmation. There has been several references to it on various blogs and forums related to B12 schools. That said, I have not seen any direct quotes from B12 officials as to whom the prime candidates are as it currently stands. Obviously, seeing this with a grain a salt would be prudent.

I tend to believe those three are the primary considerations, and others have been dismissed for now. BYU and Houston may be top two. As you know, factors can change and new information is later released.

Here are a few blogs/articles on the subject:


http://www.frogsowar.com/2016/6/6/11860 ... cincinnati

http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id ... uld-narrow

http://www.hookem.com/columns/bohls-big-12/

*(I see CowboyFrog referenced such in the B12 thread, maybe ask him if he has additional links/info.).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2016 9:43 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am
Posts: 1347
Location: Columbus, OH
sec03 wrote:
fighting muskie wrote:
sec03 wrote:
Allegedly, BYU was one of three final schools the B12 had narrowed down for expansion consideration.

BYU has all the ingredients for B12-level athletic competition, and would "add to", not dilute, the B12 product.

For now, the B12 could simply add BYU as #11, and that would not require divisions. The B1g 10 worked with 11 for years when they added Penn State. Then, the B12 could take their time in finding #12, and allow a few more years to find out who stands out going forward in terms of a new candidate.

While it adds to travel, and BYU brings with them some unique issues, it also taps into a broader market with a program that has been long-term successful in multiple sports, and with national name recognition.

Also, Houston does have some support within the B12; that could be the State of Texas-centered, but perhaps others liked them, such as WVU's Gee, when he visited the campus. While it is another Texas school, there's also a case for them athletically.

If Cincinnati was not viewed as a potential travel partner for WVU, I believe their prospect would diminish a bit.

Indicators were that the B12 was within one, maybe two, votes to agreeing on expansion. They were also divided as to which of primarily three candidates were most plausible.


So are you saying that Cincy, BYU, and Houston were the three they were deciding among or were there others?


Muskie,

I said allegedly, because it is not a confirmation. There has been several references to it on various blogs and forums related to B12 schools. That said, I have not seen any direct quotes from B12 officials as to whom the prime candidates are as it currently stands. Obviously, seeing this with a grain a salt would be prudent.

I tend to believe those three are the primary considerations, and others have been dismissed for now. BYU and Houston may be top two. As you know, factors can change and new information is later released.

Here are a few blogs/articles on the subject:


http://www.frogsowar.com/2016/6/6/11860 ... cincinnati" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id ... uld-narrow" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.hookem.com/columns/bohls-big-12/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

*(I see CowboyFrog referenced such in the B12 thread, maybe ask him if he has additional links/info.).


thanks. I was curious why the conversation has shifted to those three and wasn't sure where it was coming from.

Including Houston is probably a carrot for Texas and its voting block--I fifth school in the state gives that block a lot of sway. This is unfortunate news for either Cincinnati or BYU because one of them will lose out to accommodate Houston. Adding all three and then I fifth is probably too dramatic for a typically conservative conference.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 104 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
 

 




Looking for College Sports apparel? Support our partner:
College Gear at Fanatics.com







Support Our Partners: Search Engine Marketing - Search Engine Optimization - Search Engine Training - Online Marketing for Restuarants

Subway Map Shirts - Food and Travel

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group