16 won't even come close to succeeding. They'll need 64.I can see the B1G taking them actually but I really think the SEC long game here is going beyond 16. If they're shooting for a total CFB makeover with them as the top dog it's going beyond 16.....we'll see. I just don't see stopping at 16 as making sense for the OU/Tex move...it makes more sense if the ultimate goal is an uber conference IMO
I, for one, think it’s hilarious that ISU and KU may end up in the B1G while Texas and Oklahoma asked first and got turned away.
Should’ve taken us insteadTexas was turned down because it insisted on OU as a dance partner. If they screwed over OU like everyone else in the Big 12 they’d be Big 10 tomorrow.
Is it official news or just his own speculation...based off of tweets?
No way is Williams getting inside info from the Athletic Department. Have a connection myself to someone who works next to Pollard and he doesn't even know anything at this time.Is it official news or just his own speculation...based off of tweets?
No way is Williams getting inside info from the Athletic Department. Have a connection myself to someone who works next to Pollard and he doesn't even know anything at this time.
Pollard sit at a cube? Always thought he had an actual office.No way is Williams getting inside info from the Athletic Department. Have a connection myself to someone who works next to Pollard and he doesn't even know anything at this time.
No way is Williams getting inside info from the Athletic Department. Have a connection myself to someone who works next to Pollard and he doesn't even know anything at this time.
I have worked in research for a decade. Federal grants in the millions and tens of millions. I can say there has literally been zero mention, thought or influence of athletic conference at any point. People writing and awarding research grants probably don’t have a clue what conference a school is in. I’m not sure why people tie an individual school’s conference to its ability to attract research dollars.I'm honestly surprised how many people don't really understand what Big 10 membership really is about. The athletic budgets pale in comparison to what these schools get in research and patent money. At the end of the day, tOSU and Michigan ADs can desire all they want to go to the SEC, but the Universities are not going to give up the loss in prestige and research money to go play football somewhere else.
I have worked in research for a decade. Federal grants in the millions and tens of millions. I can say there has literally been zero mention, thought or influence of athletic conference at any point. People writing and awarding research grants probably don’t have a clue what conference a school is in. I’m not sure why people tie an individual school’s conference to its ability to attract research dollars.
Too many pieces of the pie16 won't even come close to succeeding. They'll need 64.
Of courseI think this all ends up with a 64-team league that was prophecied 10 years ago. That said, is ISU in that 64?
And I may end up with Cindy Crawford.I, for one, think it’s hilarious that ISU and KU may end up in the B1G while Texas and Oklahoma asked first and got turned away.
I agree, there seems to be some notion that the research grant money comes to the conference somehow, or the BIG has a pool of money and they decide to hand it out to universities in the BIG. I am not familiar with how the BIG Academic Alliance operates but I imagine it fosters collaboration among researchers in the BIG, and looks for ways to increase probability of funding by identifying research groups from the BIG which complement each other for a funding opportunity, all good things. But its not like NSF, CDC, USDA etc. care what conference you are in, its not like TV rights where ESPN makes a deal with a conference. Funding agencies don't fund projects because you are in a conference or send the money to the conference, they fund specific researchers who submit a proposal. Researchers get funded because of their abilities and the strength of their collaborative team. And yes the BIG has some very good researchers and capabilities and they get a tremendous amount of funding. But it is not because they are in the BIG, it is because they are good at what they do and so are others. I have served on many panels reviewing research proposals and submitted my own. It is based on the researchers and the team they put together, what conference you are in has little impact in my experience.I have worked in research for a decade. Federal grants in the millions and tens of millions. I can say there has literally been zero mention, thought or influence of athletic conference at any point. People writing and awarding research grants probably don’t have a clue what conference a school is in. I’m not sure why people tie an individual school’s conference to its ability to attract research dollars.
And I may end up with Cindy Crawford.