Jump to content
Did I hear a WOOSH?

Conference Realignment thread

Recommended Posts

On 2/3/2023 at 1:04 PM, Gonzagafan2021 said:

Not only that but majority of B12 schools don't have the academic ranking and experience that alot of PAC schools have.

That depends on what numbers you want to interpret.

 

In the Carnegie Research Classifications, the future P10 has 10 R1's, while the future B12 has 10 R1's and 2 R2's.  Stanford/Cal certainly tip the scales, but while it's not an academic ranking, the gap isnt as wide as some would portray.

 

In the USNWR rankings, which are obstensibly an academic ranking, the P10 has 4 Top 100 schools, B12 3.  Again, Stanford/Cal tip the scales (they stand head and shoulders above everybody in both conferences), but for the most part the bulk of the 2 conferences are not that far apart.  Both have cellar dwellers of sorts (WSU, WV, TTech).  The P10 is superior, but not massively so. 

 

The P12's academic rep was based on the Cal schools - and now 2 are leaving.  As is the B12's academic power (Texas).  And of the (supposed) expansion candidates, only SMU (snicker) really moves the needle.

  • Like 1

In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 2:33 PM, RSF said:

That depends on what numbers you want to interpret.

 

In the Carnegie Research Classifications, the future P10 has 10 R1's, while the future B12 has 10 R1's and 2 R2's.  Stanford/Cal certainly tip the scales, but while it's not an academic ranking, the gap isnt as wide as some would portray.

 

In the USNWR rankings, which are obstensibly an academic ranking, the P10 has 4 Top 100 schools, B12 3.  Again, Stanford/Cal tip the scales (they stand head and shoulders above everybody in both conferences), but for the most part the bulk of the 2 conferences are not that far apart.  Both have cellar dwellers of sorts (WSU, WV, TTech).  The P10 is superior, but not massively so. 

 

The P12's academic rep was based on the Cal schools - and now 2 are leaving.  As is the B12's academic power (Texas).  And of the (supposed) expansion candidates, only SMU (snicker) really moves the needle.

Bro come on Stanford and uc Berkeley are still there and are much better than majority of B12 schools 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 1:39 PM, Gonzagafan2021 said:

Bro come on Stanford and uc Berkeley are still there and are much better than majority of B12 schools 

You need to re-read the post.  I took that into account.  They're much better than ALL of the schools - in both conferences.

In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 10:49 AM, Spaztecs said:

And to the PAC.

In a few years the MW's champ will have almost the same odds to make the playoff as the PAC champ. Meanwhile, if a kid wants to stay close to home in SoCal what options does he have? 

These are the teams that would reap the most benefit from adding SDSU imo. 6 of the remaining 10. 

 

image.png.03109d815db216e30fd84361ed48e980.png

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 1:33 PM, RSF said:

That depends on what numbers you want to interpret.

 

In the Carnegie Research Classifications, the future P10 has 10 R1's, while the future B12 has 10 R1's and 2 R2's.  Stanford/Cal certainly tip the scales, but while it's not an academic ranking, the gap isnt as wide as some would portray.

 

In the USNWR rankings, which are obstensibly an academic ranking, the P10 has 4 Top 100 schools, B12 3.  Again, Stanford/Cal tip the scales (they stand head and shoulders above everybody in both conferences), but for the most part the bulk of the 2 conferences are not that far apart.  Both have cellar dwellers of sorts (WSU, WV, TTech).  The P10 is superior, but not massively so. 

 

The P12's academic rep was based on the Cal schools - and now 2 are leaving.  As is the B12's academic power (Texas).  And of the (supposed) expansion candidates, only SMU (snicker) really moves the needle.

The Cal schools AND UW. Once Texas leaves, there's nobody left in the B12 that even sniffs at Washington. 

 

R1 is so overly broad as to be meaningless.  Even the Carnegie Endowment cautions against using the classification as any kind of quality metric as the schools range from Harvard to Georgia State. I think AAU membership is the most defining followed by USNWR undergrad rankings. After that, I'd consider some of the more research/faculty/doctoral focused international rankings as well as the MUP aggregates that look at everything from faculty quality to research funding to financial resources to undergraduate selectivity. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 2:25 PM, RebelAlliance said:

The Cal schools AND UW. Once Texas leaves, there's nobody left in the B12 that even sniffs at Washington. 

 

No.  UW at 55 doesn't really do that.  As I said, Stanford (4) and Cal (20) tip the balance, then you have the remaining 5 schools in the top 100 (UW 55, Baylor 77, BYU and TCU 89, Colorado 97).  Also as I said, the P12 makes its rep on 4 schools, and 2 are leaving.

 

And, as I also said, the research ratings arent an academic measurement.

 

And the AAU, while prestiguous, is invite only (and they dont invite too many these days) and has a large research component in its criteria - the most important one as a matter of fact.

 

The association ranks its members using four criteria: research spending, the percentage of faculty who are members of the National Academies, faculty awards, and citations.

 

 

In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 1:25 PM, RebelAlliance said:

The Cal schools AND UW. Once Texas leaves, there's nobody left in the B12 that even sniffs at Washington. 

 

R1 is so overly broad as to be meaningless.  Even the Carnegie Endowment cautions against using the classification as any kind of quality metric as the schools range from Harvard to Georgia State. I think AAU membership is the most defining followed by USNWR undergrad rankings. After that, I'd consider some of the more research/faculty/doctoral focused international rankings as well as the MUP aggregates that look at everything from faculty quality to research funding to financial resources to undergraduate selectivity. 

If I looked in the right place, here are the USNWR undergrad rankings for the schools slated to be in each conference (AAU members in bold):

School Conference USNWR UG rank
Stanford PAC-10 3
Cal PAC-10 20
Washington PAC-10 55
Baylor Big-12 77
TCU Big-12 89
BYU Big-12 89
Colorado PAC-10 97
Oregon PAC-10 105
Utah PAC-10 105
Arizona PAC-10 105
Arizona State PAC-10 121
Kansas Big-12 121
Iowa State Big-12 127
UCF Big-12 137
Oregon State PAC-10 151
Cincinnatti Big-12 151
Kansas State Big-12 166
Houston Big-12 182
Oklahoma State Big-12 182
Washington State PAC-10 212
Texas Tech Big-12 219
West Virginia Big-12 234

The PAC has 7 AAU institutions (70% of membership) while the Big-12 just has one (8% of membership).  The PAC also sports the top three schools on the USNWR combined list.  A full 80% of the PAC-10 schools are ranked as well or better than 75% of the Big-12 schools.  The Big-12 has 6 of the bottom 7 and 9 of the bottom 11.  I think it's fair to say that the PAC schools are, on average, generally better regarded academically than their Big-12 counterparts.

There's a big difference between #3 Stanford or #20 California and anyone in the Big-12.  The difference between Washington and Baylor isn't quite as stark.  TCU and BYU are ranked only marginally higher than most of the remaining PAC schools.  Most of the Big-12 schools are pretty similarly ranked to Oregon State and Washington State - which I think is also where the highest-ranked MWC teams are found.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 10:30 AM, Spaztecs said:

The money from that Athletic Alliance is paltry compared to the Academic and Research side of the House.

I and other Salt Lakers have witnessed the exponential Academic and Research growth of the U since joining the PAC. Yea, the Sports side of the House has grown with new facilities and increased Coaches Salaries.

However, the big money growth has been on the Academic and Research side. In multitudes. Because of the Academic Alliances.

The PAC simply doesn't want to associate with a measly Cal State or have said Cal State play in their recruiting sand box.

Did you take writing lessons from Donald Trump?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 10:47 AM, AztecSU said:

Major nonsense. The best talent in San Diego is already going to the SEC/BIG. You think they want all the decent LA recruits doing the same? Lol. 

Yes.

All these schools are going to favor bringing in SDSU because of the number of football players they get from SoCal (numbers are from their 2022 roster): Arizona (29); Oregon State and Utah (24); ASU and WSU (22)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 10:00 AM, RSF said:

As a followup, Brett McMurphy is reporting that the holdup is not OUT or the B12, but Fox and ESPN.

In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 5:24 PM, Pelado said:

If I looked in the right place, here are the USNWR undergrad rankings for the schools slated to be in each conference (AAU members in bold):

School Conference USNWR UG rank
Stanford PAC-10 3
Cal PAC-10 20
Washington PAC-10 55
Baylor Big-12 77
TCU Big-12 89
BYU Big-12 89
Colorado PAC-10 97
Oregon PAC-10 105
Utah PAC-10 105
Arizona PAC-10 105
Arizona State PAC-10 121
Kansas Big-12 121
Iowa State Big-12 127
UCF Big-12 137
Oregon State PAC-10 151
Cincinnatti Big-12 151
Kansas State Big-12 166
Houston Big-12 182
Oklahoma State Big-12 182
Washington State PAC-10 212
Texas Tech Big-12 219
West Virginia Big-12 234

The PAC has 7 AAU institutions (70% of membership) while the Big-12 just has one (8% of membership).  The PAC also sports the top three schools on the USNWR combined list.  A full 80% of the PAC-10 schools are ranked as well or better than 75% of the Big-12 schools.  The Big-12 has 6 of the bottom 7 and 9 of the bottom 11.  I think it's fair to say that the PAC schools are, on average, generally better regarded academically than their Big-12 counterparts.

There's a big difference between #3 Stanford or #20 California and anyone in the Big-12.  The difference between Washington and Baylor isn't quite as stark.  TCU and BYU are ranked only marginally higher than most of the remaining PAC schools.  Most of the Big-12 schools are pretty similarly ranked to Oregon State and Washington State - which I think is also where the highest-ranked MWC teams are found.

I can’t speak for all schools, and am not arguing the PAC isn’t a superior academic conference because it clearly is (unimportant anyway), but not each USNWR ranking is the same either.  For example, UCF is the primary direct connect campus supporter in the state of Florida, meaning that anyone that gets an Associate’s degree from a Florida community college is guaranteed admission.  It’s a great program that I would never want to get rid of.  That said, the USNWR weighs 4 year graduation rate heavily and direct connect is largely non traditional students that rarely meet that timeline.  Another example of heavily weighted USNWR rankings is classroom size.  UCF is f’n huge and will never match the classroom parameters set by smaller schools.  Some freshman classes at UCF have larger enrollments than the number of people who show up to sdsu football games (kidding).  This list would look entirely different if it was based on traditional students with regard to admissions statistics, overall competitiveness, and quality of job after graduation..at least from UCF’s side.  Also, trends matter on these lists too. 10 years ago UCF was in the 200’s.  Up until Covid era, they’ve been moving up ~10 spots a year and that should pick up again here soon with our medical arm maturing and finally kicking UF out of Orlando.  

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 6:00 PM, RSF said:

As a followup, Brett McMurphy is reporting that the holdup is not OUT or the B12, but Fox and ESPN.

McMurphy and Thamel contradicting each other somewhat.  Interesting perspectives showing they have different sources.

The Arizona AD just gave the most oddly noncommittal interview you’d expect at this stage in the game.  It’s a good spec piece, realignment starts at 9:58. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 12:04 PM, Gonzagafan2021 said:

Not only that but majority of B12 schools don't have the academic ranking and experience that alot of PAC schools have.

Kansas, Houston, UT, and Okie State

:shrug:

"We don't have evidence but, we have lot's of theories."

Americans Mayor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 3:00 PM, RSF said:

As a followup, Brett McMurphy is reporting that the holdup is not OUT or the B12, but Fox and ESPN.

Of course. Fox loses them once they go to the SEC right? And ESPN is getting them at a discount for now. 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 3:18 PM, Did I hear a WOOSH? said:

McMurphy and Thamel contradicting each other somewhat.  Interesting perspectives showing they have different sources.

The Arizona AD just gave the most oddly noncommittal interview you’d expect at this stage in the game.  It’s a good spec piece, realignment starts at 9:58. 

 

He seems pretty committed to the PAC based on his own comments. Less sure is his stance on expansion which will clearly be based on the media deal. Are you hearing what you want to when you listen or what he actually said?

  • Like 2

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 8:28 PM, AztecSU said:

He seems pretty committed to the PAC based on his owns comments. Less sure is his stance on expansion which will clearly be based on the media deal. Are you hearing what you want to when you listen or what he actually said?

He said it’ll be based on dollars.  But it wasn’t glowing either.

“Still working through" a TV deal. Said the fourth quarter was not a good time to negotiate. "

Said they recently met as a group... "No one stood up and said they're out”

He was directly asked about AZ fans wanting to join the Big 12 for basketball reasons.

He said it would come down to the media package and stressed football dictates that. He admitted he knows how great Big 12 basketball is and says PAC can be good too.

Is there a deadline for a PAC TV deal? No hard deadline. They'd obviously like it to be done "sooner than later."

Comparing it to previous comments I’d put it in the solidly neutral column, but yeah it’s speculative as mentioned in the original post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2023 at 6:18 PM, Did I hear a WOOSH? said:

McMurphy and Thamel contradicting each other somewhat.  Interesting perspectives showing they have different sources.

The Arizona AD just gave the most oddly noncommittal interview you’d expect at this stage in the game.  It’s a good spec piece, realignment starts at 9:58. 

 

It sounds like he wants Arizona to stay. If I were an Arizona fan, I would want to stay as well. The Pac-12 is a power conference of great schools that affords Arizona an (unlikely) opportunity to play in the CFP and an almost perennial bid in the NCAA tournament, and play against their regional rivals. I would rather play Arizona State, Stanford, and Utah than Baylor, TCU, and UCF, but that's just me. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.






×
×
  • Create New...