BYU Will Leave Mountain West

by jc25 on Aug 31, 2010 6:36 PM CDT

Expect Hopkins Horn to jump in at any minute now. Per the Leader:

Brigham Young University will leave the Mountain West Conference for the 2011-12 season, go independent in football and join the WCC in all other sports, notably men's basketball, multiple sources with direct knowledge of the situation told ESPN.com.

BYU and the WCC will make a combined announcement later Tuesday.

This is notable to Texas because:

A. We're set to play BYU in 2011, '13 & '14. After the power moves by the Mountain West Conference in pillaging the WAC, BYU was forced to "settle" for the WCC. This is notable for BYU because it effectively forces them to schedule 12 true "non-conference" games instead of being able to pick a few WAC teams to play every year. Expect BYU to remain aggressive in scheduling high-profile teams like Texas to keep up brand recognition. Conversely, the more exposure BYU gets (not on Versus anymore, hooray!), the better Texas' foresight to schedule them appears.

B. Obviously, BYU going independent will provide some semblance of a template should Texas choose to go independent. If BYU independence is a smashing success, there's no reason to think Texas going independent shouldn't be more successful than the Battle of San Jacinto. If BYU fails or fades into obscurity, Texas brass will at least have a data point to mitigate any unbridled optimism about heading towards independence.

C. Also important to note is that BYU beat OU last year. And any team that beats OU is a friend of ours (well, at least until 2011 anyway).

Poll

How successful will BYU be as an independent football program?

Great smashing success

45 votes

A teensy bit more exposure

149 votes

The more things change, the more things stay the same

88 votes

Doomed to failure

84 votes

366 votes | Poll has closed

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

Tweet Comment 27 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I hate the way you've worded the title, where the comma changes the entire meaning of the sentence.

by Texas Wahoo on Aug 31, 2010 6:49 PM CDT reply actions

There

I bumped it to the front page, so I’ll tinker with the headline. As usual, JC did a great job with the post.

You ain't hurt...

by Peter Bean on Aug 31, 2010 6:55 PM CDT up reply actions

Hey, you changed my title!

Just kidding. Sorry, was in a rush to post before jetting from work and didn’t think about the ambiguous title.

Thanks for the bump, PB.

I don't always watch football, but when I do, I prefer Dos Achos. Stay thirsty, my friends.

by jc25 on Aug 31, 2010 9:30 PM CDT up reply actions

Great analysis

My last day of a week-long vacation (I love Seattle. I really really love Seattle. Schedule a home-and-home with UW stat!) and Blackberry-only access to BON, but I’ll chime in since expected. :)

I agree that this is excellent news for Texas. I’ve been a skeptic of Texas independence for a number of reasons, but as pointed out above, BYU’s going independent will provide Texas a great model to see if modern-day independence can work.

That being said, BYU’s football-only independence is not completely analogous with what I foresee would almost certainly have to be a path of total independence for Texas, since I cannot see us having any sort of WAC-style resting place for our other sports. (In short, no way in hell the other schools of the Big 12 would allow us to keep our other sports in the conference if we withdrew our football team; I don’t see the incentive for contiguous BCS-level conferences like the SEC, Big 10 or Pac Whatever to offer us a WAC-like deal, and, since “We’re Texas” and all, it’d be beneath us a bit to send our hoops and baseball programs to a mid-major like C-USA.)

As to how well BYU will succeed…my gut says VERY well on the field. More importantly, if we’re headed to a 4×16 conference structure in a few years, BYU is very wisely shedding the mid-major label now to better position themselves to be one of the chosen 64 should that much-predicted alignment emerge.

Back to the salmon…

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 31, 2010 7:16 PM CDT via mobile reply actions

Wow, you typed all of that on a blackberry?

by BrooklynHorn on Aug 31, 2010 9:22 PM CDT up reply actions

Hopefully typo-free too!

by Hopkins Horn on Aug 31, 2010 11:29 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions

Naturally not completely analogous

But a good template. I agree there’s no way the Big 12, nor the SEC, Big 10, etc. would allow us to remain. But if we’re blowing up the Big 12 by leaving, not every piece is going to find its way to a BCS conference—think Kansas or Baylor. Second, there would be a real opportunity for remaining schools and current non-BCS schools to form a Big East-esque super-conference with a 16 team league that’s strong at basketball. Imagine a league where there’s UH, TCU, Baylor, etc. and potentially add Kansas, K-State, Missouri, and an independent Texas. That’s not half-bad for a sports league. Anyways, just spitballing here.

I don't always watch football, but when I do, I prefer Dos Achos. Stay thirsty, my friends.

by jc25 on Aug 31, 2010 9:34 PM CDT up reply actions

Interesting thought...

…blowing up the conference from a football perspective might leave enough free agent schools who’d still need us from an other-sports perspective. Hadn’t considered that, but it makes sense.

by Hopkins Horn on Aug 31, 2010 11:37 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions

Thanks

I imagine in a “Texas goes independent, chain reaction follows” scenario, that OU and A&M then become extremely attractive to the SEC. But after that, every team is slim pickings. I mean, does the Pac-10 want to venture that far east to pluck Tech, a West Texas team? Would the SEC be willing to take on Okie State if it meant getting OU? Would the Big 10 prefer reaching in for a Missouri or Kansas, or would it be more content with shooting for some of those northeast television sets in Rutgers, Syracuse, etc.?

Combine that with the fact that Texas would remain a fertile recruiting base for an “up and coming” league, and that it also fruitfully supports basketball and baseball, and you imagine the remaining Texas schools would seize an opportunity to recreate the Southwest Conference, plus adding on any surrounding area schools (like a Kansas) that gets left out in the cold. At that point, if you’re trying to enhance the brand name of your league, why not bring in a school like Texas for your non-football sports (akin to what the Big East did with Notre Dame)?

Again, all extremely hypothetical.

I don't always watch football, but when I do, I prefer Dos Achos. Stay thirsty, my friends.

by jc25 on Sep 1, 2010 8:45 AM CDT up reply actions

BYU is trying to create more of a national aura

for its football program. Great move. They’ trying to shed the “small, western conference” label for one more like Notre Dame or the service academies.

I’m not one of those who sees the 4×16 conference alignment as the coming wave, but clearly there will be more shifting of allegiances. My guess is that before doing this, BYU talked to ADs from non-Mountain West schools (including DeLoss Dodds), and BYU’s conclusion was that a more national footprint would better serve its (apparent) goal of aligning with schools higher profile than New Mexico, UNLV and Colorado State.

I’ll even predict that BYU and UT are part of the same conference before 2020.

by edsp on Aug 31, 2010 7:25 PM CDT reply actions

Posturing...

To get in a better conference once the super conferences form. I think its more about doing that then trying for independence as a permanent resolution.

by Orangechipper on Aug 31, 2010 7:59 PM CDT reply actions

Our upcoming schedule of OOC teams is no coincidence

Notre Dame, BYU, USC and Marylan being scheduled/discussed all while we are muttering around about conference re-alignment and the possibility of going independent. I’m not a conspiracy theorist type guy, but this is more than mere coincidence. Are we about to announce a series with a service academy by chance?

by Wrangler86 on Aug 31, 2010 8:44 PM CDT reply actions

It's going to be interesting

Too see what type of TV contract BYU can get. Do they go the Notre Dame rout and air home games from their own network and sign a TV contract for road games? How successful will their network be? Or does it all blow up in their faces and they have to go crawling back to the Mountain West or WAC?

"It ain't over till it's over." - Yogi Berra

by KSJ49 on Aug 31, 2010 9:48 PM CDT reply actions

Should be doable

Remember that road game contracts are out of their hands except to the extent that they schedule teams (like us) that will get them on national TV via another conference’s contract.

Assuming they’re able to schedule pretty well, and I think they should be able to, I think securing a three or four game contract with ESPN should be a piece of cake, especially if BYU’s willing to play a couple of those games on Thursday or Friday nights. The other home games against the WAC-caliber teams can be shown on BYU-TV.

by Hopkins Horn on Aug 31, 2010 11:34 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions

Agree, shouldn't be difficult

I would think NBC might be an attractive option, if they could work around Notre Dame’s schedule to stagger their games when Notre Dame isn’t on the peacock. Unless NBC makes more money airing infomercials, I don’t know…

Another option is to target the Turner channels, TNT/TBS, who are making a bigger push into the sports marketplace. There’s some brand recognition there from sports fans, and there could be cross-marketing with the baseball playoffs and NBA regular season start.

I don't always watch football, but when I do, I prefer Dos Achos. Stay thirsty, my friends.

by jc25 on Sep 1, 2010 8:49 AM CDT up reply actions

Could They be coming to Big XII?

We know that at least to leave our conference you have to pay to leave for another. Could this be their way of getting around that for their conference to then join XII when CU leaves? They would fill a big gap in the conference that will come into existence when NU and CU are gone.

by Silentjay on Sep 1, 2010 12:13 AM CDT reply actions

Invite Them Today

Keep 2 divisions – ok it sucks one would have 5 teams. Keep the dam game in Jerry World. That exposure is great. What is the downside here? or is it they just wouldn´t come? They would be favored to win the north almost immediately.

Note to Bill Byrne "Because you aren´t Texas and you´ll never be Texas"

by realmccoy on Sep 1, 2010 9:03 AM CDT up reply actions

have to have 12 teams to play a CCG..nt

by vy til i die on Sep 1, 2010 10:26 AM CDT up reply actions

chit. Invite their wives to form a team then.

Note to Bill Byrne "Because you aren´t Texas and you´ll never be Texas"

by realmccoy on Sep 1, 2010 4:01 PM CDT up reply actions

Not happening

A) They would join the Big 12 in a heartbeat.

B) As noted above, you must have 12 teams to have a conference championship game.

C) The conference will get X dollars from an upcoming TV deal. Presently, 10 teams are about to split X dollars. Current schools will not invite an additional (nor two additional) schools to come in and decrease their slice of the X dollar pie b/c X is not going to increase unless you add a new TV market that the networks deem desirable enough to pay even more than X. (UT and A&M already bring in the DFW, Houston, San Antonio, and Austin markets and thus large improving schools like U of H and TCU aren’t being considered either.)

by Lincoln on Sep 1, 2010 3:59 PM CDT up reply actions

But

But how much impact in dollars and prestige does the Big XII game bring? Enough to bring 2 independent football teams? How bout Memphis – would that help at all? Know the city is big enough but not sure they even care about Memphis football. Air Force for the military angle? Bring some vets and some LDS may help nationally.

Note to Bill Byrne "Because you aren´t Texas and you´ll never be Texas"

by realmccoy on Sep 1, 2010 4:04 PM CDT up reply actions

Big 12 schools have been told ESPN will pay them the same $ amount even if no championship game.

So no additional money will be added to pie and coaches don’t want the title game (nothing to gain in national title picture yet everything to lose). Existing network partners ESPN/FSN wanted/needed Big 12 to survive and thus have promised to pay more than previously despite fewer teams and no title game.

by Lincoln on Sep 1, 2010 4:22 PM CDT up reply actions

Just wondering...

Why would Texas even need to be independent? You already run the Big 12, you make more money than any other athletic program in the country, and you’re about to increase those revenues substantially with your own television network.

The only logical reason I can think of (doing it for the sake of prestige, not money, is not what I would consider logical, BTW) is more flexibility in scheduling national-type programs, such as Notre Dame and Ohio State.

But even in the new Big 12, you easily could schedule one or two of those every year, plus face Oklahoma and Texas A&M. Texas is a good enough program that it doesn’t need to schedule patsies, and it probably will increase the value of the Texas TV network if it stops doing so.

Just the thoughts of a K-State fan who’s obviously biased, because Texas going independent would reduce us to mid-major status. But the Longhorns got everything they could have wanted this summer. If you’re already significantly richer than anyone else, when does the pursuit of even more money finally become meaningless?

by BracketCat on Sep 1, 2010 12:29 PM CDT reply actions

Positioning and shedding weight

These thoughts make sense, and you’re right that dollars upon dollars will eventually become meaningless. However, I believe Texas, along with any institution that wants to continually be better and grow in all aspects will do whatever is most beneficial to that cause. It is far from proven (which I have been unable to do as a supporter of at least the concept of going IND), but if we can shed ourselves of anything that prohibits the program from locking in more marquee match-ups, more exposure, etc, why wouldn’t we? And while we are aware that Texas is often perceived as greedy and arrogant (especially lately), I have to wonder why we keep the remainder of the Big XII attached to our hip – particularly now, given the gimpy, terminally-ill condition the conference is in. This sounds pompous and I don’t mean it to, but what’s in it for us to stay in the Big 12-2, especially taking into account the uncertainty of this conference and the layout of college athletics altogether in the relatively near future?

by Infield Elephant on Sep 1, 2010 12:57 PM CDT up reply actions