NCAA conference realignment

[countdemoney]

Saw this one and cracked up:

Quote of the day: "No wonder Baylor is fighting so hard not to get left behind by Texas, Texas Tech and Texas A&M, they think this is the rapture." --a tweet from @Pac16Conference

http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/v...ollegefootball

===========

I really think it's over for the Irish if they don't join a conference. It would be boom or bust bowl wise (they would only be able to get into BCS bowls, or the lowest tier) and I think you could make a credible threat not allowing a big 10 team to play them if they don't join.

 

[StephenHero]

Originally Posted by MrG

That was actually the first thing I heard about Texas and Texas A&M. It came out right after the Big 10(+1) started talking expansion. The idea was that the SEC would want to expand, it has the clout to pull teams of that caliber, and the state of Texas would give it a massive new market. If the SEC expands, which I think is a big if even if the Bigs/Pac do their thing, the Texas/Texas A&M option is my favorite idea. Here's a pretty solid article that gives a lot of detail on the options for Texas and conference expansions: http://www.scout.com/2/974965.html
-Apparently, if the SEC expands, it will do so on the east coast by targeting a combination of Florida State, Miami, North Carolina, Clemson, and Georgia Tech. -Texas would rather be in the SEC than Pac 10, but there's no indication that they could have the same influence in the SEC they do in the Big 12 or Pac 10, which ultimately makes the uncertainty a deal breaker. -Texas A&M would like to be in the SEC too in order to get out the UT's shadow, but it doesn't seem like a possibility. -If Notre Dame declines, Nebraska joins the Big 10, it would likely kill the Big 12. The south schools would bolt west and leave Baylor behind if Colorado had already joined the Pac 10. It's a nightmare scenario for KU, ISU, K-State, and possibly Missouri if they don't get an invite because of the league numbers. KU & MU would have to team up to try to get the Big 10 to take two more, which would be a long shot considering the Big 10 still wants to get into the NYC TV market with UConn, Rutgers, or Syracuse. There would be talk of those Big 12 leftovers joining the Mountain West, but I don't think KU or MU would go for it. Each of their AD revenues are double that of the highest MWC school. Iowa State would join the Conference USA. MU and KU would each try to join the Big East or SEC as backup plans. The Big East needs football schools and wouldn't have a choice but to accept them and start a western Big East division with Louisville, Cincy, etc. or else they're be in trouble of dissolving as well.

 

[HRoi]

**** the NCAA. I love this and the expansion of the basketball tourneys - blatant revenue boosters while their employees - who like in most organizations, are the true revenue generators - have a pay range somewhere between Jack and ****

 

[HORNS]

I believe that if Texas is going anywhere, it would be to the Pac 10. Texas would appreciate the increased exposure that both the football and basketball teams would have in terms of recruitment. Not only that but Texas feels that the greatest academic and cultural compatibility is with the Pac 10 schools. Yes, I realize that a school like Florida is a great public school. Furthermore, Texas would rather NOT have to play a schedule that SEC schools play for a conference title.

My God, I'd love to see the Longhorns come to Berkeley or Palo Alto on a regular basis!

 

[JoyDiffusion]

Most sensible course of events is probably for ND to join the Big-10. Midwest school, similar demographics, plays Big-10 style of game, and is arguably the best conference historically (legacy, national championships, etc). Independence is overrated... They can still get their butts kicked by USC every single year, and can definitely hang in the Big-10, maybe even get to some better bowl games. As a Big-10 fan, I'd prefer to see only ND join, and if not, Nebraska, then Missouri.

Agree that Texas in the PACIFIC-10 (or 16) is dumb. Especially ALL the texas teams. UT is the only one that might make sense in Big-10 OR Pac-10, because they're one of the dominant programs in dozens of sports, male and female. Tech and A&M are decent in football/basketball, but let's not kid ourselves, they're way behind UT overall.

It doesn't matter that the teams can afford to travel 1000 miles to go to a game, most fans/students/family members cannot. Conferences should be regional, end of story. Better for rivalries anyway, with pretty much one exception (USC/ND). Texas and Oregon/Washington are nowhere near each other, and have very little in common, it's just dumb for them to play every year. And that would make for a terribly boring conference championship (since that's how the Pac-16 would break down, with all 6 new teams in a division with AZ/AZ State).

 

[HORNS]

Originally Posted by HRoi

**** the NCAA. I love this and the expansion of the basketball tourneys - blatant revenue boosters while their employees - who like in most organizations, are the true revenue generators - have a pay range somewhere between Jack and ****

What really frustrates me is the way the BCS hinders the development of new fans because of its indecipherable system of who plays who.

 

[Mark from Plano]

Originally Posted by MrG

I've been following it, and I think it sucks. Among other things, I'm afraid it's going to encourage schools to play even fewer decent out-of-conference games, and it's going to result in wacky in-conference schedules.

I've also heard talk of Texas and Texas A&M going to the SEC, but the bigger Pac-10 seems to be the popular topic right now.

Originally Posted by grundletaint

i'd love that

I don't see any of the Big 12 schools going to the SEC. SEC is already a gauntlet. Nobody wants to add to their conference schedule. PAC 10 is basically a one-school conference (USC) in football. Better fit for the Big 12 guys to cast their lot.

Originally Posted by kwilkinson

Okay, I can get the Big 10 having 11 teams. We get it. And the subtle little 11 in the graphic can be cute.
But Texas, Missouri, and OSU in the PACIFIC Conference? I Mean WTF

Talk is that you're basically headed toward 4 "super-conferences" one way or the other. Question is who will be the first to land the big plums that can up their TV revenues. It's all about money and negotiation of TV deals. That's why a Baylor or a Kansas is going to be a hard sell for people. They just don't add much to a football TV deal, which is what will drive this whole thing.

 

[StephenHero]

Originally Posted by Mark from Plano

I don't see any of the Big 12 schools going to the SEC. SEC is already a gauntlet. Nobody wants to add to their conference schedule. PAC 10 is basically a one-school conference (USC) in football. Better fit for the Big 12 guys to cast their lot. Talk is that you're basically headed toward 4 "super-conferences" one way or the other. Question is who will be the first to land the big plums that can up their TV revenues. It's all about money and negotiation of TV deals. That's why a Baylor or a Kansas is going to be a hard sell for people. They just don't add much to a football TV deal, which is what will drive this whole thing.
This doesn't have that much to do with scheduling, unless that scheduling affects money. For example, Nebraska has an easier time getting to the Big 12 title game than they would in the hypothetical Big Ten West. They only have to beat those five Big 12 North teams with unexceptional football programs to get a shot at a BCS game every single year. That would make them favor the Big 12 for that revenue and exposure. But ultimately they're still interested in the Big 10 because of the extra TV revenue from the Big Ten Network. Once the conference realignment happens (if it does) one of the first orders of business will be to eliminate the two team limit per conference rule for BCS games, so teams can get away with scheduling tougher teams. An extra loss or two won't hurt them as much as that extra revenue helps them. So a school like Texas wouldn't worry having to play LSU, Bama, FLorida, and the other SEC flavor of the month in the same season.

 

[StephenHero]

Good article. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...enarios/1.html

In honor of the proposed Pac-16, here are 16 scenarios for how the dominos from this week's decisions may fall, ascending from the most conservative to the most radically far-fetched. 1. Notre Dame stays put (for now), Nebraska and Missouri pledge loyalty to the Big 12 and the Big Ten and Pac-10 go back to the drawing board. It cannot be stated enough that Texas and its fellow reported South Division defectors would prefer to keep the current Big 12 intact. Sources say the league will command plenty of increased television revenue (albeit still not split equally) the next time it renegotiates its contracts. If Nebraska and Missouri officials decide it is either too risky to wait on a Big Ten invite (long assumed to be their preference) or plain have a change of heart, Texas and Co. stay put, too. We go back to waiting to see if the Pac-10 makes a more modest expansion (Colorado and Utah?) and/or the Big Ten turns its attention East (Rutgers? Syracuse?). One immediate domino: The Mountain West -- currently waiting to see what happens with the Big 12 -- goes ahead and invites Boise State. 2. All of the above holds true, with one exception: Missouri holds out. Great. The Big 12 plucks a team like TCU to replace the Tigers and life moves on. (And Missouri sits and prays it's not making a gigantic miscalculation as to the Big Ten's interest.) 3. Notre Dame ends 120 years of independence, joins the Big Ten. Don't get me wrong -- this would be a gigantic development. It would probably cause riots on Notre Dame's campus, for one thing, and it would give the Big Ten a fourth national brand-name team to go with Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State. However, it would also likely put a kibosh on most other potential conference shakeups. Most believe the Big Ten would be content to end its expansion push with Notre Dame, which would in turn preserve the Big 12 and Big East. Personally, I don't see this one happening. Notre Dame AD Jack Swarbrick previously indicated the school would only consider joining a conference if its hand were forced -- and that hasn't happened yet. 4. Nebraska bids the Big 12 adieu. There goes the conference. Nebraska AD/former coach Tom Obsborne has been at odds with Texas nearly since the league's inception, what with much of the conference's policies seemingly tailored to the Longhorns and their Lone Star counterparts. The Big Ten offers more money, equal revenue sharing and a fresh start. If an invite appears imminent, the Huskers head north. A Big 12 without one of its three marquee franchises will no longer be palatable to Texas. The 'Horns will accept their invite to the Pac-10, and the other five will follow. (The only question is whether Colorado or Baylor, the latter of which is politicking hard for inclusion, would get the sixth bid.) The remaining holdovers -- Kansas, K-State, Iowa State and the Colorado/Baylor loser -- begin scrambling for a new home. Every remaining scenario from here includes this component as a starting point. 5. The Mountain West pounces. Seizing an opportunity, the Mountain West -- to this point facing an uphill climb to gain a BCS automatic berth -- would suddenly find itself in a position to reconfigure itself as a bona fide player. With the Big 12 out of the picture, the MWC could invite any or all of the following -- Colorado, Kansas, K-State, Iowa State and Boise State -- to move to 12 teams. If not, a team like Iowa State could be left completely out in the cold. Conference USA, anyone? 6. Kansas becomes a LeBron-like free agent. One of the great mysteries amid the ongoing Pac-16 speculation is what will become of Kansas, which, while not necessarily a football power, has a huge alumni base, sits in a decent TV market and, most notably, boasts one of the nation's most prestigious basketball programs. It's seems hard to believe the Jayhawks will fade into the wilderness. Kansas has pledged its loyalty to the Big 12, but if the league implodes, who's to say the Big Ten wouldn't couple KU with Missouri? For all we know, Jim Delany prefers the Jayhawks. If not the Big Ten, what about the basketball-centric Big East, which knows no geographic bounds (see: Marquette)? It could be that KU can't go anywhere without K-State, thus diminishing its appeal, but if not, another major program could be changing major conferences. 7. The Big Ten pulls a power play, snags Texas. We know from e-mails obtained by the Columbus Dispatch that the Big Ten has coveted the Longhorns all along. While it's assumed Texas is more interested in the Pac-10 (hence, the imminent invitation), Delany could still pull off one last sell job. He could point out that his league's TV network has a four-year head start on the Pac-10's proposed venture and/or he could invite buddies Oklahoma and Texas A&M. (We already know Texas has a "Tech problem.") Nebraska -- which for this to unfold would have to fail to commit to the Big 12 -- may be left out of the Big Ten, to boot (yet another kick in the stomach by Texas). Perhaps the Pac-10 would come calling for the Huskers and/or Colorado, or perhaps Nebraska would try to start a new league with Kansas, Kansas State, et. al. 8. The Big Ten adds Nebraska -- and Notre Dame. Why is this more radical than Big Ten/Texas? Because of the ripple effect it would cause back East. And as stated before, Notre Dame's sole motivation for joining a conference would be the imminent destruction of the league (the Big East) in which all of its other sports teams participate. With that in mind... 9. The Big Ten goes to 16, adds Rutgers, Syracuse (and maybe Pittsburgh). We've long assumed the Big Ten wants to get into the New York City area. If it does so solely by plucking Rutgers, the Big East will be fine. (Heck -- maybe it can upgrade by adding Kansas.) Were it to lose two or more teams, however, the sport's smallest BCS conference would have to once again reinvent itself. Possible replacements could include Conference USA schools UCF and Memphis, which last year hired ex-Big East commissioner Mike Tranghese as a consultant. 10. The ACC sticks one last knife in the Big East ACC commissioner John Swofford stabbed Tranghese in the back seven years ago with his secretive purge of Miami, Boston College and Virginia Tech. If Delany does pick off multiple Big East teams, it's possible Swofford would come back to finish the job. Peeved that the Big East has surpassed the ACC as the nation's preeminent hoops conference, he might welcome Connecticut, Louisville, Pittsburgh and West Virginia. Or... 11. A new conference is born. For a brief, glorious four-year run in the early '90s, Nick Van Exel (Cincinnati), Penny Hardaway (Memphis) and Tom Kleinschmidt (DePaul) wreaked havoc in the short-lived Great Midwest. Why not bring it back -- only with a different lineup and a football edition? I hereby propose the following consortium of teams plucked from the potential wreckage of the Big 12 and Big East: Cincinnati, Memphis, Louisville, West Virginia, USF, Connecticut, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and Baylor. With a couple of strong years, who's to say this league wouldn't qualify for BCS status? 12. The SEC goes on the offensive. To date, the nation's proudest football conference has stayed out of the expansion melee, and with good reason: It's got no need to expand. The Big Ten is expanding in part because of shifting population away from its states -- to the South. The Pac-10 needs 16 teams just to get in the same ballpark financially as the 12-team SEC. There were signs the SEC might pursue Texas and/or Texas A&M, but it appears those schools will stick together either in the Big 12 or Pac-16. The SEC can afford to stand pat, but if it decides to become proactive... 13. The SEC annexes Florida State and Miami. Sure, the conference already has the Sunshine State's flagship school, Florida, but it couldn't hurt to gain a stranglehold in the nation's most fertile state for elite football prospects. The ACC would survive, but its existing television arrangements would not -- despite their recent struggles, FSU and Miami are by far the two most nationally renowned brands in that conference. Admittedly, Florida might singlehandedly put the kibosh on this one -- but if not... 14. The SEC goes to 16, adding FSU and Miami plus Clemson and Virginia Tech. Now the SEC -- which loves to boast about its "speed" -- would officially enter "ludicrous speed" territory. The league's members would boast more combined national championships and BCS title-game appearances than all other conferences combined. (That's an exaggeration -- I think.) The remaining ACC teams would have no choice but to join forces with the Big East (or what's left of it) to remain a viable football conference. 15. The remaining BCS conferences apt for symmetry, form four 16-team quadrants. If they do, hopefully they cut a royalty check to Andy Staples, who first coined the Collegiate Athletic Select Hegemony (CASH) -- including a hypothetical "Pac-16" -- back in February. (Sadly, poor Iowa State got left out in his scenario, too.) The 64-team format could logically lead to fans' long-desired playoff: Four league championship games (between division winners) would serve as de facto quarterfinals, feeding into a "Final Four" that could be played at existing bowl sites. Of course, under this scenario, Utah/Boise State/BYU et. al., would be left on the outs yet again, leading to even more threats of Congressional hearings and antitrust lawsuits. Unless... 16. The four super-conferences lift off into outer space ... er, abandon the NCAA. The concept has existed since at least the early '90s: The sport's football megapowers -- tired of sharing (or being pressured to share more of) their hard-earned revenues with the Ball States of the world -- will simply break off and form their own autonomous governing body. No more AQs and non-AQs. No more Boise State-TCU Fiesta Bowls. No more "FBS" period. Personally, I don't think things will ever get this far. Football may be king, but it's just one of 20-plus sports offered by major conferences, none of which will want to deal with all the bureaucratic hassles that currently fall to the NCAA. University presidents also find comfort in the antiquated notion that the NCAA preserves a sense of "amateurism" in what has unavoidably become as cut-throat a business as any for-profit endeavor. Then again, less than a week ago I never would have predicted that Pac-10 presidents would sign off on expanding into Norman, Okla., and Lubbock, Texas. By this time next week, anything and everything could be possible. Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz0qK7o03eW Get a free NFL Team Jacket and Tee with SI Subscription

 

[JoyDiffusion]

Originally Posted by StephenHero

Good article. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...enarios/1.html
Great article, thanks for posting. There's really so many issues at stake, this is a pretty cool story. The article points out how ND wants to be an independent, but the Nebraska/Texas decisions could cause a domino effect destroying the Big East, forcing ND to join a conference. Only thing is, they barely even mention Oklahoma once?! They're a huge football power. After reading this article, I'm surprised how little attention this has gotten. I've heard rumblings on ESPN of course, but this has the potential to permanently alter the NCAA landscape in every sport. Much more so than BC, VA Tech, Miami to the ACC a few years back. I mainly care about the Big Ten... it sounds like they're largely in the driver's seat, and if the Big-12 falls apart, they get the pick of the litter (Nebraska, Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas (for bball), or whomever they want from the Big East). Would love to see this thing go to #15 or 16 per the article.

 

[ConcernedParent]

Originally Posted by Mark from Plano

I don't see any of the Big 12 schools going to the SEC. SEC is already a gauntlet. Nobody wants to add to their conference schedule. PAC 10 is basically a one-school conference (USC) in football. Better fit for the Big 12 guys to cast their lot.
Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Berkeley, Arizona, Arizona State......?

 

[Dakota rube]

My only hope in all this posturing is that a wooden stake is driven through the NCAA's heart. Oh, and that all these schools and the conferences continue to focus on the "student-athletes".

 

[MrG]

Originally Posted by StephenHero

-Apparently, if the SEC expands, it will do so on the east coast by targeting a combination of Florida State, Miami, North Carolina, Clemson, and Georgia Tech.

-Texas would rather be in the SEC than Pac 10, but there's no indication that they could have the same influence in the SEC they do in the Big 12 or Pac 10, which ultimately makes the uncertainty a deal breaker.

-Texas A&M would like to be in the SEC too in order to get out the UT's shadow, but it doesn't seem like a possibility.

-If Notre Dame declines, Nebraska joins the Big 10, it would likely kill the Big 12. The south schools would bolt west and leave Baylor behind if Colorado had already joined the Pac 10. It's a nightmare scenario for KU, ISU, K-State, and possibly Missouri if they don't get an invite because of the league numbers. KU & MU would have to team up to try to get the Big 10 to take two more, which would be a long shot considering the Big 10 still wants to get into the NYC TV market with UConn, Rutgers, or Syracuse. There would be talk of those Big 12 leftovers joining the Mountain West, but I don't think KU or MU would go for it. Each of their AD revenues are double that of the highest MWC school. Iowa State would join the Conference USA. MU and KU would each try to join the Big East or SEC as backup plans. The Big East needs football schools and wouldn't have a choice but to accept them and start a western Big East division with Louisville, Cincy, etc. or else they're be in trouble of dissolving as well.

I've also heard talk of the SEC going into Virginia. In a vacuum, teams like Tech, FSU, UM, and Clemson are appealing, but they won't expand the SEC footprint, which is what this is really all about. The SEC could add VaTech and add the state of Virginia to its influence. UNC would have the same effect, but I'm not sure they're all that appealing to the SEC. I think that if the SEC does expand and Texas is off the table, we'll see it go after VaTech first, and then some combination of the teams you list (with FSU being a high priority given its rivalry with UF and national reputation).

The Texas question is interesting. On the one hand, the SEC doesn't prorate its financial share, so Texas wouldn't receive a bigger payout relative to other teams in the conference (which it does in the Big 12 and presumably would in a Pac-xx). On the other hand, the SEC allows schools to keep their media rights, which doesn't happen in the Pac-10 (not sure about the Big 12). This means Texas would have to give up some of its revenue share, but it would maintain the ability to make money via media.

There are also academic concerns for Texas. The reality is that the Pac-10 is simply stronger overall in terms of academics. There are some good/great schools in the SEC. However, there still aren't as many great schools, and the schools are much more willing to compromise their standards to bring in recruits.

I agree about Texas A&M. I just can't see them going anywhere other than where UT goes, even if they really want to.

Originally Posted by Mark from Plano

I don't see any of the Big 12 schools going to the SEC. SEC is already a gauntlet. Nobody wants to add to their conference schedule. PAC 10 is basically a one-school conference (USC) in football. Better fit for the Big 12 guys to cast their lot.
...

I've heard this, and I think it sucks. I hate the fact that there's such an incentive to avoid playing quality teams. That said, as an SEC guy it will totally legitimize all of our "we're the best" bluster. I mean, we're so good that other teams, even teams that played in the NC recently, refuse to join our conference because it's so tough.

 

[crazyquik]

In the 1920s, the Southern Conference had 23 teams (it later split and became the SEC and ACC, and then dropped some of the smaller schools).

Super-conferences have been here before. We may experience another round of expansion, but eventually they will split apart as well.

With that said, the ACC expansion was stupid, and the conference should be split into thirds (ACC North, Central, and South). I have no idea how you run a 16 team conference when there aren't 16 football games per year. I suppose you have 2 divisions, and you only play some teams once every other year? Not much room left for non-conference games. They seriously aren't going to play some teams in their own conference one out of every 3 years are they?

 

[Mark from Plano]

Originally Posted by crazyquik

In the 1920s, the Southern Conference had 23 teams (it later split and became the SEC and ACC, and then dropped some of the smaller schools).

Super-conferences have been here before. We may experience another round of expansion, but eventually they will split apart as well.

Pre-TV. Doesn't count.