BYU contemplating football independence

by Hopkins Horn on Aug 18, 2010 11:33 AM CDT

As many theorized during Conference Realignment Armageddon, a polarizing school with a nationwide fan base and its own network, with plans to play football at DKRTMS in 2001, might be better served by ditching the conference system and going its own route, at least for football.

Yes, BYU is apparently considering football independence and joining the WAC for its other sports.

My initial perspective is that I like the proposed move, at least from BYU’s perspective.

Keep in mind that I generally have dismissed most schools’ abilities to successfully make a stab at independence, and that includes Texas.

I hadn’t contemplated BYU independence, but the school would certainly have a nationwide fan base few other schools have.

Additionally, on the risk-reward side, the balance in favor of reward is much greater for BYU than it would be for most other schools.

To use Texas as an example, since most have surmised that Texas would have the best chance of any BCS school of making the move, the rewards could be great, but the risks are very great as well — giving up the security blanket of a conference which if you win it, you play for the championship; scheduling in October and November; and finding a home for non-revenues.

The risks for BYU strike me as not being anywhere near as big. Geography (and, perhaps, anti-LDS bias) has condemned BYU to mid-major status if it remains in the conference system. Winning its conference and going undefeated guarantee nothing. (See: Utah 2004 and 2008; TCU 2009.)

Run the table on an upgraded independent schedule (it’s easier for BYU to "upgrade" by replacing UNM or SDSU or UNLV than it would be for Texas to replace Big 12 school), though, and the chance of appearing in a championship game might increase.

Exploit the built-in nationwide fan base, and perhaps earn the school a lot more money than The Mountain brings the school.

And if the WAC wants to be the useful idiot as the parking space for the non-revenues, all the better.

Plus, the school already has its own nationwide network (BYU TV, which is carried by at least DirecTV nationwide, up in the religious channels for now). It's apparently planning to take it HD soon.

BYU and Utah both leaving the MWC is all but deadly for the conference in its attempt to upgrade to BCS status, even with the addition of Boise State. What does this do to TCU? Would this make the Frogs poachable by, perhaps, the Big East? (Let's not reopen the TCU-to-the-Big 12 debate, since it seems as though the conference is wisely staying at 10 schools.)

I now await Wrangler86's strong denunciation of BYU's arrogance for playing an independent schedule for football and joining another conference for all of its other sports.

All comments, FanPosts, and FanShots are the views of the reader-authors who create them.

Tweet Comment 28 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

If they can get an ESPN deal for their football, as has been rumored, this is genius.

They are the biggest draw in the MWC and now they can collect all of the checks themselves.

This makes Boise State’s move kind of humorous. When they first considered it, they thought they were joining a conference on the edge of the big six. Now? The step up is much smaller to join an 8 team league.

by Texas Wahoo on Aug 18, 2010 11:47 AM CDT reply actions

More or less agreed on all counts

I think BYU has found a backdoor into the BCS party.

proud to swim home

by learned hand on Aug 18, 2010 12:07 PM CDT reply actions

This is just the beginning

BYU, TCU, Baylor, Notre Dame, Boston College, Saint Mary’s, Emory, Davidson, creating the first super conference and naming themselves the “Holy War”.

"The words printed here are concepts. You must go through the experiences." - St. Augustine

by Funkytown on Aug 18, 2010 12:53 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs

I'd predict bias from the commentators

I mean, when the Christian schools throw a long pass it would be called a “Hail Mary”, but you let an Islamic school into the mix, and the same pass would be called a “bomb”.

by UTLawGrad on Aug 18, 2010 5:35 PM CDT up reply actions

I lol'd

Never ask a man if he's from Texas. If he is, he'll tell you soon enough. If he's not, don't embarrass him.

by LonghornEm on Aug 19, 2010 6:17 AM CDT up reply actions

too funny!

"You've got to find your inner pirate" - Mike Leach

by Raider1992 on Aug 19, 2010 4:00 PM CDT up reply actions

Need SMU in that mix

As well as half the Big East

by Silentjay on Aug 18, 2010 10:22 PM CDT up reply actions

Chinchy

I wasn’t going to list every single one in the nation. Slack: Cut me some.

"The words printed here are concepts. You must go through the experiences." - St. Augustine

by Funkytown on Aug 18, 2010 11:56 PM CDT up reply actions

Looks like all but a done deal.

by TXStampede on Aug 18, 2010 3:16 PM CDT reply actions

how exactly does this benefit them in a championship sense?

I mean, this BYU we’re talking about not Boise, not Utah, not TCU. This is not a team that goes undefeated in the WAC or even the Mountain West. In fact they haven’t been undefeated since their lone championship in 1984. So will improving their schedule benefit them if they can’t run the table in their current conference? Might make financial sense for them , i don’t know that aspect of things, but from a BCS standpoint they have a long way to go winning wise before the strength of their schedule will become a factor. I would be amazed if they got a deal from ESPN out of this though, but even BYU games beat 24hr coverage of Brett Favre brushing his teeth.

by Lothor on Aug 18, 2010 4:20 PM CDT reply actions

Admittedly...

…the road is tougher, but it’s improved.

If BYU is ambitious with its scheduling (think back on the way Bobby Bowden would play anyone, anywhere back in the 1980s to help get FSU to the top of the college football world), BYU could be playing a hell of a lot more high profile games than it is currently.

Getting out of a conference whose games are buried on The Mountain and into a scenario where ESPN has 3-4 home games a season, plus high-profile road games (like Texas next year) on national TV as well, gets its much more exposure than it has now.

It has the nationwide fan base in place.

It’s doable.

My other thought is that BYU could be trying to better position itself for what many see as an inevitable 4×16 world in a few years. If BYU wants to be part of the 64, better to shed itself of its mid-major affiliation now.

by Hopkins Horn on Aug 18, 2010 4:26 PM CDT up reply actions

That actually makes a lot of sense

Poising themselves above other mid level teams with the looming mega conferances makes them look better. Yea they probally were on PAC’s radar, but if they can still do good going independent then they should not be a 2nd class team come the mergers.

by Silentjay on Aug 18, 2010 4:39 PM CDT up reply actions

MWC retaliates by stealing Fresno and Nevada?

Is this an attempt to make the WAC not as desirable for BYU’s other sports?

by Texas Wahoo on Aug 18, 2010 6:26 PM CDT via mobile reply actions 1 recs

Couple thoughts on realignment:

HH, your insight on expansion/realignment is always appreciated, so I would have only hoped for you to jump on this. The concept overall appeals to me, particularly because it is the sign of the times, acting as a prelude to the inevitable restructuring of college athletics – football mostly. But at this point, I expect to see a litany of situations like BYU’s announcement coming soon. Based on the clear desire to explore more expansion opportunities that Larry Scott, Jim Delaney, and Mike Slive have expressed – and the not-so-clear desire Dan Beebe has expressed – I can only sit back and watch the scurry of ants at a picnic until it is all said and done. BYU going independent took me by surprise, but I am not shocked at all.

I’ve mentioned before my having little problem with going independent (safer than saying I am straight-up for it). If BYU has the national fanbase, a TV deal, a sufficient SOS, and a decent record with bowl appearances, it is undoubtedly beneficial for them to do so. This won’t be entirely accurate, but I think there is an analogy in there somewhere that would say something to the effect of: BYU is to the MWC as Boise St was to the WAC. I may even venture to say that BYU is to the MWC as Texas is to the Big XII, only on a vastly different scale. Both the Cougars & Longhorns are positioned in their respective conferences in which they are needed to keep the conference intact more than they need the conference. This is part of my support for the idea of Texas going independent, sometime in the near-ish future.

by Infield Elephant on Aug 19, 2010 11:17 AM CDT reply actions

As I type...

…BYU might be reconsidering for the very same reason it might be difficult, if not impossible, for Texas to pull off independence: what do do with all of the other sports.

The MWC has seriously weakened the WAC in the last 24 hours. The conference might not be an adequate resting place for the rest of BYU’s sports.

If Texas wants football independence, it will need total independence for similar reasons. There won’t even be a WAC-type solution out there for us.

Shameless plug alert! Have young ones or know people who do? Want awesome photos? Want to help a fellow Longhorn out? Consider my services! Visit my site and my Facebook page for more info. Based in SoCal but visiting Dallas/Austin/Houston, Chicago and DC to shoot this fall. Contact me for more info!

by Hopkins Horn on Aug 19, 2010 12:40 PM CDT up reply actions

Those are good points

and I retract the word “undoubtedly”. Also, here’s an Ute take on BYU you may find interesting.

I’m going to come up with a solution to the whole “other sports” dilemma and it’s going to be awesome. Gimme a minute.

by Infield Elephant on Aug 19, 2010 1:33 PM CDT up reply actions

It's been an hour. You ready yet?

by Hopkins Horn on Aug 19, 2010 2:29 PM CDT up reply actions

Arbitrary timeframe for the purchase of time to mull over

and to maybe admit that I am not going to come up with a solution. I still maintain that independence could benefit us and probably BYU if other sports were not an issue. But you are right – they are.

Naturally, we’re going to revert back to pointing to Notre Dame and their [other sports’] affiliation with the Big East. Could the Big XII remain as is with our ability to land a jumbo TV deal/create Bevo TV and keep the entirety of our football revenue? This is a bit of a broken record, and these are not identical situations, but can you describe the key differences between ND’s current Independent/Big East situation and Texas following a similar suit? (genuine question to for someone knowlegdable, not an argument necessarily).

My other thoughts in support of the idea are things we’ve discussed, but in relation to BYU’s situation, I think we are positioned in a more prominent place to pull it off, where if they can do it, I certainly think we could. These things:

…But I also think that a lot of what draws us away from the idea is 1) we don’t want to be like Notre Dame, and 2) it may not make the most sense in our current way of thinking. We will be going around in circles on this for a while until we eventually see a relatively huge modification to the current system and in turn, what determines a school’s prominence. Technology, the media, fan bases, the game itself are constantly changing at a pretty fast pace.

by Infield Elephant on Aug 19, 2010 2:55 PM CDT up reply actions

Differences between our situation's and Notre Dame's

The key as I see it:

Notre Dame has traditionally been independent in all sports. A lot of observers, including me, believe that, one day, ND will land in a conference for all of its sports. The Big East is the weakest “major” conference. It is of little risk and possibly high long-term reward for the conference to affiliate with the Irish for all of its other sports. Perhaps, one day, the Irish will look to give up football independence and will see that the Big East is a better fit for a Catholic university than the Big 10 would be.

Texas is a founding member of a conference which emphasizes football above all else. Texas abandoning the Big 12 for football would practically destroy the conference, and without the carrot (or would it be the stick? I’m confused) of Texas football to keep the other schools in line, I see no chance in hell that the other remaining schools would allow Texas to remain a member for all other sports save football.

All that being said, I think it would be far easier for us to go the full independent route than it would be for BYU. BYu is fairly isolated geographically and, absent a conference affiliation, it will find itself scrambling and traveling a lot more than it would prefer for all of its other sports. Filling an schedule for baseball and tennis and women’s soccer and the like would be more difficult for Texas without a conference affiliation than with, but at least we have a lot more scheduling options within a reasonable drive/flight from campus than BYU does.

by Hopkins Horn on Aug 19, 2010 3:18 PM CDT up reply actions

Is C-USA a possible option?

It would not be ideal, particularly for basketball, but it could work.

by Texas Wahoo on Aug 19, 2010 2:03 PM CDT up reply actions

HH: Great stuff

I think independence is a can’t-lose for BYU. A good decision if made before Utah’s defection, a better one now. The decision-makers at the school just saw their in-state rival grabbed by the Pac-10. They’ve seen the carnage that was the Big 12 reduction. They’re aware of the recent Texas-Notre Dame scheduling agreement.

While not all the pieces are in place, there clearly will be more shuffling into and out of conferences in the next 3-5 years. BYU may not be Nebraska or Virginia Tech, but it brings more to the realignment/repositioning arena than TCU, Baylor, Colorado or Houston. The key is for BYU to be willing to play on odd days of the week to get TV exposure, to travel to tough venues to ensure a high-quality schedule, and to recruit enough quality to put put up several 8-4, 9-3 teams that make the school attractive enough to the “big dogs,” around whom any conference realignment will coalesce.

by edsp on Aug 19, 2010 5:55 PM CDT reply actions

I agree 100%

And then I wonder what happens when the realignment doesn’t happen any time soon. Hopefully that buys them time to build up an attractive resume, but they would be up a creek with poor or even inconsistent seasons leading up to it.

by Infield Elephant on Aug 19, 2010 6:34 PM CDT up reply actions

Thanks, edsp

I also think BYU’s leap is great news for those like IE who advocate Texas independence. Though, as elaborated upon above, the situations of the two schools aren’t completely similar, you can bet your bottom dollar that Belmont will be keeping an extra sharp eye on BYU to see if modern-day independence can in fact work. It’s a great trial run for us.

by Hopkins Horn on Aug 19, 2010 7:01 PM CDT up reply actions

I don't think we'll EVER go independent

It’d cause too much problem in the lesser sports and, I believe, even in football. (Can anybody name the last time a UT men’s sports team played as an independent, and why?)

I like what BYU is doing — get out of a conference that likely won’t be BCS in football (and thus has second-class status, fair or not). Seems to me the school is positioning itself to “grab” an opening in a BCS conference, either when the Pac-10 expands again or when the Big 12 reconfigures.

Also, I applaud thinking outside the box.

by edsp on Aug 19, 2010 9:09 PM CDT reply actions

BCS conference opening, thinking outside the box

I agree with both points here. I won’t pretend I know the exact route that Texas could succeed in going independent, nor do I propose that this should be done next season. BYU is being bold in an attempt to position themselves for greater things, as you said, and I also respect that. This is not the situation for Texas, so the same won’t apply, however I do think that bigger & better things lie ahead for us and we are maybe being held back if we don’t move somewhere down the line (which I’m sure we will at some point).

Not to come off as naive – I realize I am weaving around some key points – but I think there will be a very sizable change to the way collegiate sports are handled, sooner than we may think. This would entail advancements in technology, which would no doubt affect the media, which affects a multitude of components including the BCS, game rights, and big TV contracts which could very well be flipped on their heads as we move into a more web-streaming, mobile viewing of sports. The point being that college athletics, football in particular, have not always been conducted the same way, nor do I think they should continue to.

A hypothetical: Texas goes independent in 2015, following a handful of others doing the same. We are able to secure a strong (maybe stronger than ever before) schedule in all sports. Bevo TV is running wild and others are following suit with the likes of GatorVision, TrojanMedia, Inc., and Buckeye Broadcast Network. Schedules are all over the map with some consistency in rivalries, geography, etc, as big time institutions are bidding year in/out for games that are beneficial both financially and to the strength of schedules. At this point, there is at least a some major alterations in the handling of the National Championship in football, so this leads to either a 4×16 conference set-up, or something else altogether.

Which poses another question: if the BCS did not exist and the post season was facilitated by a playoff of the top 16 teams, would we really need conferences? I understand their purpose now, but in the spirit of thinking outside the box, are we reluctant to change because that’s just the way it’s always been?

That’s a bunch of scattered thoughts. I’m not necessarily petitioning for independence, but I am entertaining the prospect of doing so and am not totally convinced it could not work. I do know this, I have less interest in remaining in the Big XII or even joining another current set-up than I do independence.

(as I write this, I see that BYU & Texas confirms ’11, ’13, & ’14)

by Infield Elephant on Aug 20, 2010 9:47 AM CDT up reply actions