BYU decides to go independent
by John Berkowitz on Aug 31, 2010 6:15 PM PDT
Email
PrintBrigham Young University will leave the Mountain West Conference for the 2011-12 season, go independent in football and join the West Coast Conference in all other sports. The WCC confirmed it today and it will be announced at a joint press conference tomorrow. BYU will be an independent like Army and Navy as opposed to Notre Dame which is guaranteed a BCS bid if it's in the top eight in the final BCS standings.
The school has worked out a football schedule for the 2011 season that will include annual games against Utah, Utah State, and Hawaii. Texas, Boise State, and Oregon State are also signed up for future games. Expect the schedule to also include games with San Jose State, New Mexico State, and Idaho from the WAC during the short term because filling a 12 game schedule isn't going to be easy.
The reason for the move is simple. With the right schedule, and ESPN deal, BYU will generate up to five times more football revenue on their own than they would have in the MWC. Could be a good move. We'll see.
39 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The logical candidates would be Pacific, Seattle U, and Denver.
by John Berkowitz on Aug 31, 2010 6:39 PM PDT up reply actions
There's no "independent" in TEAM!
Better yet? join Notre Dame to create the “most annoyingly deluded conference”? or something….
What's wrong with the independent status?
And what does it have to do with the word team? I wouldn’t be surprised if more mid majors went independent if things don’t work out for them. If the MWC doesn’t get Boise State to the elite status, could they go independent in football? It’s not impossible to think about. They would control their own scheduling and woudn’t have the burden of misconception of playing in a lesser conference. I think this is one reason why BYU has opted for independent status. I think BYU thinks they are on the verge of being pretty good annually again. They have their own network and they lost their league rival (Utah). If BYU goes 11-1 as an independent do they get a BCS invite? Theirs a good chance they will, especially if their schedule is deemed somewhat difficult. And with the independent status in football, BYU would keep all the bowl money for themselves and not have to share it with league affiliates. It makes sense if they can pull it off.
All I saw was purple
Bold move
And I like it. If BYU earns a BCS bowl bid they keep all the money just like ND. Have you seen BYU under Mendenhall lately? I think they are on the verge of becoming something great. To me, other then Washington, Stanford and BYU have both impressed me in the recruiting department. Harbough will be looked at seriously by Michigan if and when. But if the independent status in Provo is successful, I think BYU might have longevitey with Mendenhall.
BYU has their own network, like Notre Dame. The church owns it. My question is will the mormon church use the network to showcase BYU sports? I see independent status becoming quite the trend again in college football. Notre Dame might never join a league, BYU just went independent, and their is speculation that Texas might go independent some time in the future.
The MWC is now starting to look more and more like the old WAC- Boise State has to be bumming. The only winner in all of this is the Utah Utes.
All I saw was purple
BZZZZZ, try again
And I like it. If BYU earns a BCS bowl bid they keep all the money just like ND
False!
ND doesn't keep all the money.
In fact they get a much smaller cut with the deal they have with the BCS. They get a small paycheck every year (about $1 mil) no matter what, but if they play in a BCS game they don’t get anywhere near a full share.
You hit on something important Crazi
This could be the start of a trend where the independent football program once again becomes a viable option.
What type of deal could Texas cut on their own?
by John Berkowitz on Aug 31, 2010 9:05 PM PDT up reply actions
Well for starters
They own the Big 12 Conference. And reap all the revenue of the league. Evenutally schools like Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M, and Texas Tech are going to get fed up with the crumbs. Texas has been granted permission form the other Big 12 schools the option of striking out on their own to invest into a Texas Longhorn-only network. If that thing ever gets up and running, the Longhorns won’t need the Big 12. They’d have total domination of Texas, an annual trip to a BCS bowl game, and a multi million dollar deal with their own network.
Back to BYU: Why squat in the MWC? What benefit do that have sitting there, with or without Utah? It would seem that BYU was put in a no-win situation. They want the BCS tag, but no one wants them. So if no one wants them, they are essentially saying to the MWC and the rest of college football, to hell with you all! We are good enough and rich enough to go at this by ourselves. I think it’s perfect timing to test the waters as an independent. And mark my words, if an independent BYU is successful, Texas might be the next to think about it.
All I saw was purple
VOILA
I have been advocating this for a long time. Let all the big shot programs go independent and they can play each other in a semipro league and pay the players.
The rest can go back to the Jack Armstrong “All American Boy” days and remain amateurs. Once again put the emphasis on education.
Let the basket weavers, ballroom dancers have their own way. Why even attend classes as it is now with tutors, test takers, and so on.
One of the trickiest issues
will be revamping the non-BCS bowl tie-ins.
If an independent team falls short of an at-large BCS berth, currently they will drop all the way to filling in an unfilled slot in the most minor of bowls, if they are lucky.
It’s hard to negotiate a deal with a bowl, because there is such a difference in how a team could do, ranging from 10-2, or even 11-1, and still not get a BCS invite, depending on how others do, all the way down to 7-5 or 6-6. And everything in between. That’s hard to sell to, say, the Outback Bowl.
It could well bring back the old days of a free for all, which created unacceptable uncertainty for the bowl committees. That’s what led to conference tie-ins, so that a bowl could count on a team of approximately a given level, and tied to the financial level they operate at. Which as much as anything is what led to the end of the independents, who couldn’t afford to lose the dollars, and more importantly, the exposure, for recruiting, fund raising, etc., of not getting to a bowl, never mind one of the good ones.
The solution is likely to be coalitions of a group of teams, which, curiously, sounds a lot like a conference.
Andy Wooldridge, andy_wooldridge@yahoo.com
BuildingTheDam.Com
Go Beavs!
The solution is likely to be coalitions of a group of teams, which, curiously, sounds a lot like a conference.
Tough to say what it will all evolve into but that is a distinct possibility if more schools choose the independent route.
My take is that BYU is in a holding pattern waiting for a BCS conference to join. In the meantime they don’t have to share football revenue while things sort themselves out. BYU draws 60,000 per game and has a national/worldwide following. You may not like them but they are BCS worthy.
by John Berkowitz on Aug 31, 2010 10:28 PM PDT up reply actions
That's what I've been saying for years
When BYU was in the old WAC and since joining the MWC, BYU has been the premere program. Politics have gotten in the way, but they are BCS worthy. If not for the religous aspect, does the Pac 10 invite BYU over Utah?
This move allows BYU staying power. With Utah joining the Pac 12, BYU can’t be seen as the lesser program. And staying in the MWC would do just that. BYU has been recruiting very well since Mendenhall took over and I think they are on the verge of something special.
My take is that BYU is in a holding pattern waiting for a BCS conference to join.
Until things sort out, BYU wants to be on the cutting edge of things and the MWC doesn’t supply that anymore. Going independent does, at least for now. However if the Big 12 implodes like many think it will, the lower tier prorgrams could invite BYU to join them. But for now they keep all the money and the more they win, the more money they don’t share.
All I saw was purple
BCS worthy but not Pac 10 worthy
There is a difference.
UW Dawg Pound - SBN Seattle
by John Berkowitz on Sep 1, 2010 9:12 AM PDT up reply actions
If not for the religous aspect, does the Pac 10 invite BYU over Utah?
Because the PAC-10 is an educational/research power conference. BYU isn’t. Full stop. BYU has issues with censoring staff/faculty, and their reputation as a research institution is that they’re not. They would be a good fit in the SEC, Big East, ACC, or even the Big-12, but their academic status keeps them out to the PAC-10 as well as the Big-10.
I think whatever is left of the Big 12 when it falls apart will be there eventual home.
UW Dawg Pound - SBN Seattle
by John Berkowitz on Sep 1, 2010 10:11 AM PDT up reply actions
You may not like them but they are BCS worthy.
With a full BCS-conference slate, sure. On their own, with 4-5 WAC teams on the schedule, no.
Their following and game day attendance don’t make them BCS-worthy; beating enough BCS-caliber teams each season (which they could do, if they ever tried), would.
It will be really interesting to see how they work out future schedules.
UW Dawg Pound - SBN Seattle
by John Berkowitz on Sep 1, 2010 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions
Bowls
I think the top 4 teams of a BCS conference and teh top two of a non-BS conference should be automatically given bowl games. Now, what type of games would be decided on the final rankings of a season, though the #1 teams in every conference would be ‘tied’ into specific bowls. The rest of the invites go out on a per-team basis.
Strengths? Traditional games remain traditional, so you don’t lose much flavor. The best teams get invited. Great independent schools have real shots at great bowl games.
Weaknesses? You know that people will bitch about the #2 Sun Belt team getting an invite for sure and the #5 PAC-10 team not getting one.
by Shane Patrick H on Sep 1, 2010 1:08 AM PDT up reply actions
The No.5 Pac 10 would get a bowl bid over a No.2 Sun Belt. It’s not really about wins/losses anymore. It’s about marketing, filling butts in seats, filling up hotels, spending money, and televisison revenue. Some schools travel well and others not so much. Why do you think Ohio State gets a BCS bowl bid annually? It’s not like the Big Ten has been lighting things up lately. BuckeyeNation travels as well, if not better then anyone.
I’m on the fence about a playoff, but this BCS system stinks. If I had my choice between BCS system and the old way- I’d revert back to when conferences were locked into certain bowls. The Rose Bowl truly sucks when the Pac 10 champ and the Big Ten champ don’t meet in Pasadena. Then again I’m crazi and I think the media is voting mid majors higher they they should. Boise State, TCU, and Utah are good teams, but they don’t belong in the top 10 with their annual strength of schedule. My theory will play out once Utah joins the Pac 12.
All I saw was purple
Rose Bowls and Utah
Maybe I’m just a dinosaur, but I miss the old bowl systems. I don’t like Oklahoma or Miami in the Rose bowl, and I miss the other conference match ups. Adding an extra playoff game or three after that would be fine with me. But I hate the current set up.
Yes Crazi, after Utah plays 10 or more tough games, we will know a lot more about UU, not to mention also BYU and TCU.
Concerning BYU, I’m not sure why elite teams will schedule them. First of all, non conference games are played before conference play begins. So who does BYU play in Oct and Nov? As a MWC team, I don’t play them. Major conf teams, I doubt it. I know UW (and others) play ND in mid season, but ND is unique and these games are set up years in advance. Concerning Sept games, remember the ABC rule, or BBC. or CCC. If BYU is an “A” team, how many schools want to play them? No body wants to play three A’s, they need those breathers before conference play begins. I think their best scenario is a quick fold of the Big 12.
BYU
is the worst travelling team imagineable. No coffee, no liquor, no tips. Eat all meals in hotel room. Going out would expose them to aliens and de-programmers. Could be dangerous.
BYU calls UW the "cougars"
From the Summer 2010 BYU Magazine:
The Short List: Five things you won’t want to miss (p. 22)
#5
“BYU vs. Univerisity of Washington…Rise and Shout! The Cougars are out—this time for both teams. Washington’s mascot is also a cougar….”
Scheduling will be the issue
BYU’s success or failure at being independent rests solely on how well they can create a schedule that will keep them in the hunt for a BCS bid. As has been pointed out already, without a BCS bid, they’ll be in a minor bowl played sometime before December 23.
However, this all depends on how long they stay independent. If they’re just waiting for major realignment that will come when the rest of the Big-12 realizes that Nebraska was right in bolting against the power of Texas, then this is a good move.
But if they think they can be NDjr, and remain independent then it will be tough. It will all depend on how much money they will have available to entice other schools to come play them. With money and TV exposure they may be able to pull it off. But if they’re not getting enough from ESPN to entice a couple high level teams to play them each year then I think this goes down as a failure and they end up back in a mid-major conference.
Texas will be watching with much interest
They are going to follow BYU around, spy on them if you will. They will watch every move BYU makes. Successful or not Texas will be taking notes. If school-owned networks become some what the norm for the richest universities my question is- would it create to much media thus becoming over crowded, which could lead to us being over stimulated? The Big Ten network has been up and running for a 1/2 decade now and I have the channel. But to this day I haven’t watched it. How relevent could these school-owned networks really be? Especially if they start popping up all over the televsion guides?
I’m not convinced BYU will stay independent. This is a bold move to ensure BYU has both staying power and options. If and when the Big 12 crumbles (as expected), being independent now means that they can join a new Big 12 with out any hang ups, i.e. conference buy out clauses. This is a brilliant move if that is the intent.
All I saw was purple
Texas could care less about BYU
Texas is in a completely different category.
UW Dawg Pound - SBN Seattle
by John Berkowitz on Sep 1, 2010 9:14 AM PDT up reply actions
True...
But the idea is to see how this works out for BYU in the initial stage of going independent. That way if and when Texas decides to go independent they’ll have some sort of frame work to go with. Texas will look at the moves BYU makes in the initial phase, then will make ajustments accordingly.
All I saw was purple
I don't think crazi is crazy here
John is right in that this is probably a short term move by BYU, but probably one that lasts a few years. John is also right that Texas is in a different category. But they will be paying attention, as the BYU network and their ability to negotiate will bring new data to the equation on the issue of focused televising. Any significant successes or failures will get analyzed.
Texas didn’t get to be in a different category by not paying attention.
Andy Wooldridge, andy_wooldridge@yahoo.com
BuildingTheDam.Com
Go Beavs!
For my part, I agree with both statements
Texas is in a completely different category, and in fact Texas could care less about BYU — quite a bit less, in fact. I would doubt theyy’ll be watching as closely as crazi thinks, but if BYU makes a success out of this, you’d have to figure that Texas could go independent and be a far bigger success; and one way or another, it seems reasonable to think that they’ll make use of that, whether by actually going independent or — if they decide to stay in a conference for other reasons — by using the possibility as leverage.
by The Ancient Mariner on Sep 2, 2010 4:52 AM PDT up reply actions
Not just Texas
USC will be watching closely as well. They are not going to be happy campers if the Pac-12 forces them to equally share TV revenues, and if they feel confident they can schedule well enough as an independent they would strongly consider it. I think the biggest thing that would hold them back is finding a good home for their non football sports, because I seriously doubt the Pac-12 would be OK with keeping those teams if the football team isn’t a part of the package.
Season kicks off in one day ...
… buckle up ladies and gentlemen
It’s going to be a wild ride!
PS – that’s Lear’s dog in the background.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
I love that video!
Nothing like pulling a little zero G, especially when the engine starts to sputter because of it.
Sorry Crazi, it’s not me, my airplane is much bigger and faster. Plus, I’d own a Malamute or a German Shepherd.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Is this some sort of abstract prediction of events at Provo?
In the end…..Dawgs flying all over the place! Coach Mendenhall (at the controls) finally can’t take the blowout and his headgear goes flying…?
Think About It...
…first game of Locker’s senior season as a Husky! GO DAWGS!!
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
