Lots of news lately about possible conference realignments in the NCAA. I see the first official move was made today with Colorado agreeing to join the Pac-10. The Pac-10 is also looking at several other Big 12 schools. The Big Ten is looking at adding members with Nebraska and Notre Dame being mentioned.
So how will this affect college swimming? My gut tells me it's neutral or negative. I think football is the driving force in these realignments and it will just marginalize the non-revenue sports even more than they already are.
Any thoughts?
P.S. by the way, the Pac-10's possible realignment to a 16 team conference by adding six Big 12 teams will only increase the number of men's swim teams to seven in the conference (Texas and TAMU being the new ones). So the conference would go from 5/10 teams fielding men's teams to 7/16.
Latest standings from this year:
1. Stanford
2. Ohio State
3. Virginia
4. Duke
5. North Carolina
Yeah, the ACC sure does suck as an overall athletic conference. :)If I actually cared more, I'd have to dig into the data, the model, the weightings. There's something screwy here when UVA and athletics are combined. I'll give you UNC and Duke and Bernadino's done more with the UVa swim team over the years than I ever imagined, but I doubt if you asked the average American college sports fan to rank a powerhouse school that Virginia would be in their top 5. Maybe someone's ranking lacrosse too heavily in the algorithm?
Sadly, I'm still sad about the #1 team ... moreso because I believe it ... not for swimming, mind you, but overall, the Cardinal's pretty darn good. There, I said it. I'll never get invited to an event in Austin ever again.
...cuz they were #6 and you only printed 5?
or was it because you picked the '08-'09 list instead of the '07-'08 list where UNC was #14 (oh yeah, Texas #5)? Or how 'bout the '05-06 list where Texas was #3 and UNC #4?
Actually, there's some cool data on this, except for the fact that that school with a tree for a mascot always seems to be #1. :badday:
Latest standings from this year:
1. Stanford
2. Ohio State
3. Virginia
4. Duke
5. North Carolina
Yeah, the ACC sure does suck as an overall athletic conference. :)
Latest standings from this year:
1. Stanford
2. Ohio State
3. Virginia
4. Duke
5. North Carolina
Yeah, the ACC sure does suck as an overall athletic conference. :)
Chris:
Give those guys in the Big 11 a break, they only have a few more days of being an actual conference.
As far as the conference realignments go, it's not worth debating which school does better among all sports. The move is all about football.
If you think about it conferences are much more important in football, though. The only thing people really care about in basketball is the NCAA Tourney and that isn't nearly as tied to conference as football bowl games are. Yes, the conference tournament winners in basketball get an automatic bid to the dance, but good teams will get in regardless of their conference affiliation. In football many of the bowl spots are allocated to the various conferences.
As far as the conference realignments go, it's not worth debating which school does better among all sports. The move is all about football.
Look at the Big 12. Colorado - good football, awful basketball - got out. Nebraska - good football, awful basketball - got out.
And the schools that got screwed? Missouri - good football, good basketball. Kansas - weak in football, top-notch basketball.
If you think about it conferences are much more important in football, though. The only thing people really care about in basketball is the NCAA Tourney and that isn't nearly as tied to conference as football bowl games are. Yes, the conference tournament winners in basketball get an automatic bid to the dance, but good teams will get in regardless of their conference affiliation. In football many of the bowl spots are allocated to the various conferences.
I agree. For football, it comes down to football and the TV contracts that each conference can generate. Notre Dame can do well on its own - no other school can say that (though Texas thinks it can). After that, the Big Ten network is really important, then the SEC-CBS contract.
Nebraska cut itself a sweet deal - it was shortchanged in the Big 12 because the Texas schools took most of the money, and it came into a pot of gold because of the Big Ten network. Not bad for a state with fewer people than Metropolitan St. Louis.
Basketball TV ratings aren't very high until the tournament, and as you point out, conference affiliation isn't important in the NCAAs (unless you are in a minor conference like Patriot League - there conference is about the only way you'll get in).
Texas has the largest budget and revenue in the country - about $140M. Its Directors Cup performance is decidedly mediocre considering the money spent. I believe they will finish in the 11-20 group this year, now that they are out of baseball.
This academic year I think they performed as expected in football, men's swimming, and women's volleyball. They probably finished in the hunt for baseball, softball, golf and tennis. They underachieved in basketball, soccer, women's swimming, and track and field.
Texas is showing that they are an athletic financial powerhouse, but on field results don't match up.
It pains me to defend UT but this post is misleading. Look at all those sports they support, that is the most impressive thing to me. That is a lot of opportunities for a lot of kids.
Texas has the largest budget and revenue in the country - about $140M...Texas is showing that they are an athletic financial powerhouse, but on field results don't match up.For those of us in "minor" sports, I think we'd be happy if each of our respective alma maters could learn more about fiscal prowess when it comes to athletics; the number one reason always given for cutting swimming programs is money. I know many of us don't always like the glory (and # of scholarships) that football or basketball teams get on campus, but if they keep the coffers full and the chlorine pumping, more power to 'em.
...cuz they were #6 and you only printed 5?
or was it because you picked the '08-'09 list instead of the '07-'08 list where UNC was #14 (oh yeah, Texas #5)? Or how 'bout the '05-06 list where Texas was #3 and UNC #4?
Actually, there's some cool data on this, except for the fact that that school with a tree for a mascot always seems to be #1. :badday:
Texas has the largest budget and revenue in the country - about $140M. Its Directors Cup performance is decidedly mediocre considering the money spent. I believe they will finish in the 11-20 group this year, now that they are out of baseball.
This academic year I think they performed as expected in football, men's swimming, and women's volleyball. They probably finished in the hunt for baseball, softball, golf and tennis. They underachieved in basketball, soccer, women's swimming, and track and field.
Texas is showing that they are an athletic financial powerhouse, but on field results don't match up.
