Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
Not sure why some folks think the Big12 would want to be a 16 team conference. Pretty sure the Big12 (or whatever the conference is named) will be 20-24 teams by 2036 or whenever the ACC breaks up. IMO bigger is better, especially once subscription based sports platforms take hold in a few years. More schools means more people to buy subscriptions and more platform traffic to watch sport programming and non-sport programming. And also traffic to market products as part of an interactive viewing experience.
After Oregon & Washington, there isn't a high-end Pac12 school from a media rights valuation. But the 4 corners are all solid and fit well with Big12 schools. The upside potential is there based on market size: Phoenix, Salt Lake, Denver and Tucson. Also the Pac12 v Big12 games should peak interest beyond a single region of the country. Lastly, the corner 4's value will grow once they have been freed from the ball and chain that is the Pac12 Network.
Not sure if this has been discussed here or in another thread. Guess what? A 16 team conference (SEC) has decided the "rigors" of a 9 game conference schedule is too much. They have continued with 8 games. Another reason they say us that they have non-conference opponents all lined up. Sure, that must be it.
Wish a columnist would have the guts to report what it is - the SEC wants to avoid a loss to bolster their resume. They know the committee doesn't care at all at the SEC's team's schedule. It's all record and eye test. Have not seen one columnist mentioning this. If they do, the SEC fans, SEC coaches, and the SEC itself will blackball the columnist or restrict the columnist's access.
Wish a columnist would have the guts to report what it is - the SEC wants to avoid a loss to bolster their resume. They know the committee doesn't care at all at the SEC's team's schedule. It's all record and eye test. Have not seen one columnist mentioning this. If they do, the SEC fans, SEC coaches, and the SEC itself will blackball the columnist or restrict the columnist's access.
The Big12 went to 9 conference games to get paid more. If the SEC is going to be paid the same then why make their load heavier? ESPN will still talk up the gauntlet the SEC has to play. SEC playing easy non con has always been a thing.
I agree that the SEC should play 9 conference games. Same goes for the ACC.
That.said, will give them a pass as I feel 2024 is the last year they will play 8. Could be they want to see if ESPN is more eager to bump the SEC media deal in another year. Or as they say, don't want to break contracts with some FCS schools.
Do think when the 12 or 16 team CFP goes out for open bid in 2026, the Big10/Pac12/Big12 schools need to create a level playing field to be eligible for CFP bid. Ten P5 games seems right.
Question: why can't people accept that ISU isn't a preeminent university in the nation? We are R1, and that's nothing to scoff at. But with the lack of support from the legislature and the general demographics/geography of Iowa, itll be tough to maintain anything better than that. And that's OK. You can do a lot of good for your state without NIH money.
I wont cave this, but I'll just simply say people are upset that we lost our AAU status. If its something we never had, then whatever but losing it stings.
Part of it is the Squawk fans that push AAU membership constantly in ISU face now especially in online forums. (they just think its another feather in their cap.) So it is just another Hok annoyance.
Could be the tired notion that our academic position is because of lack of state support.... Iowa state support is basically Identical to Michigans...and they dont seem to have a problem. (as of 2021 per student support in Iowa is $5587, in Michigan it is $5515.)
Could be that all the excuses for why we dropped AAU early dont make much sense when you compare ISU to many other Schools, still in, or just getting in AAU. It would be nice to get a realistic answer why some of these schools still qualify but ISU doesnt.
Would you mind providing a source for this Iowa vs Michigan student support? I did a quick Google search and it stated University of Michigan's per student state support was over $13,000 and the average was $7,141 for the 2019 fiscal year. Didn't see a figure for Michigan State. Thanks.
National Science Foundation - State Indicators
National Science Board Science and Engineering Indicators. A broad base of quantitative information on the U.S. and international science and engineering enterprise.
ncses.nsf.gov
I really haven’t heard much about it other than here, and just saying you need it to be considered for the B1G.
Have you tried asking Hawk fans if AAU is what prevented them from actually attending Iowa? Or did something else send them to community college?
The answer is simple: it's a good ol' boys club. The criteria to remain a member is to have the support of enough other members that the majority doesn't ask you to leave. The fault lines are simple enough. The UC school system wants all of their schools in, and have been steadily adding them to their bloc. The B1G, ACC, and PAC have enough members to keep their own included, hence Oregon remaining a member. Guessing the B1G sponsored Notre Dame as part of their charm offensive. Ironically if the Big 12 and the PAC had merged the PAC members might have had enough sway to keep Iowa State's membership.
When you have a commuter school like USF become AAU, it is not a good ol' boys club.
AAU criteria has changed with increased emphasis on med school research and the newbie AAU members all have med schools. It was no longer worth it for ISU to inefficiently allocate financial resources just to maintain AAU status and with the risk of eventually being booted out anyway due to the revised AAU criteria.
I don't disagree with that statement, but how does Iowa State overcome the perception that it's less an academic school now that it doesn't have the AAU association.
AAU might be a lot of quid pro quo in the selection process. But the gamesmanship seems to indicate being AAU is important to the vast majority of University Presidents.
ISU explained it in their withdrawl press release. They can't nor should worry about what other Presidents think about AAU and its changing criteria when you have schools like USF getting in.
This, When USF and ASU are getting in, it is pretty clear that AAU membership doesn't mean what it used to.ISU explained it in their withdrawl press release. They can't nor should worry about what other Presidents think about AAU and its changing criteria when you have schools like USF getting in.
I actually feel in a way this makes AAU membership more important. If the bar for entry is lower, it makes it look really bad if you aren't in.
It is like the evolving criteria for making a bowl game. In the 70s and 80s you could miss a bowl and still make a good case that you had a good team. Today, if you can't make the cut you are bad, period. The bar is lower, and thus failure to clear that low bar is a bad look.
AAU has diluted the honor by preferential ratings for medical while ignoring engineering and sciences. Not that prestigious
