Quote:
Originally Posted by DeezNutz
And when all of the dust settles, that's why academics have nothing to do with conference realignment.
Sure, certain universities want to align themselves with strong academic institutions to increase perceived reputation of their own institutions, and the CIC presents an economic and (tangible) academic advantage for schools in the Big 10.
Beyond this, grant money and state appropriations will not change, which points us to the real prime mover in all of this. See: Nebraska.
|
I think NU was a "brand name" grab, and at the time, was AAU rated. I don't pretend to know the motivations of each conference. I don't think the motivations can necessarily be boiled down to one common motivation. In the SEC, its obviously football. In the ACC, it appears to be academic standing, location, and basketball. In the PAC, its about TV market share because the availability of schools is limited by geography.
The B1G strikes me as the classic big academics/big athletics college fraternity. I think academic standing standing or perception does matter to them. Of all the conferences, I also think tradition matters the most to them, and that is why long time rivals like MU, KSU, KU and NU have sentimental value. Why continuing MU versus Illinois is a good thing. That "midwest people" have a lot in common. I don't think the B1G just tosses those things out in consideration, otherwise, I think they would have went after FSU and Texas even harder.