I'd rather have Rice than Houston if the Big 12 is so determined to add another freaking Texas team.
You have to remember, this is now a league with less AAU schools (or that type of school) than even the cheatin' SEC now. Not only do we have the smallest footprint and smallest population base - the perception problem should extend to academia. The old Big 12 was right with the PAC and ACC in terms of AAU % with Colorado, Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Texas, Texas A&M. With the Big Ten of course at 11 for 11. Still, 7 out of 12 was a good number - with Baylor operating a very well-regarded private religious school and Oklahoma one of the better non-AAU schools out there.
Now we have 3 out of 10. Granted, TCU - like Baylor, is a really good private school. But it's not a great look. I do think it is pretty clear academics DO matter to the Big 12 right now and that this perception is factoring in. Boise State and ECU are complete football schools. ECU averages 40,000 in bad years and can fill a 50,000 stadium regularly. Boise State has had consistent, high % football attendance for over a decade and are adding to their stadium. Yet they are gone and Rice and Tulane remain. I think (hope) that says something.
Now - I don't think Rice or Tulane will make the final cut. Ultimately they and their athletic departments are too small. But I get why they are here. I think the likes of Memphis and UCF are going to get cut next - they just don't make the "grade". And if the academics do matter more than the average football fan or talking head thinks, that is good news for UConn. You Huskies should be pleased if reading the tea leaves in the first round of cuts proves anything.
I'm not going to say this whole thing hasn't been perceived as or felt like a clown show - but frankly, cutting Boise and ECU before Tulane and Rice is one of the more sane actions of this process thus far.