Blog Entry

More expansion: A proposed new look

Posted on: February 10, 2010 10:30 pm
Edited on: February 11, 2010 2:02 pm
  •  
 

The Mountain West is on notice.

The Big East too.

Don’t forget the Big 12 which could be ripped asunder.

One or all of those conferences are going to be impacted if, as expected, the Pac-10 and Big Ten expand in the near future.

After writing about the big picture on Wednesday, we’re here to speculate freely about how other conferences might be impacted.

Mountain West: After leading his league to the brink of BCS automatic qualifying status, commissioner Craig Thompson has to be concerned.

A BYU-Utah defection to the Pac-10 makes a lot of sense. In basketball, the league has travel partners (Washington-Washington State, Arizona-Arizona State). The Utes and Cougars are bitter rivals but would be make ideal additions due to the far-flung nature of the league.

I still don’t know how the Pac-10 views the academic aspect of expansion, so I’m not sure how it views the combination of a state school (Utah) and what amounts to a private school (BYU). If there is a fallback, it could be San Diego State.

If the Big Ten were to take Missouri, that’s a potential three teams ripped from the Mountain West and could mean the end of the league.  The three most likely replacements would be Boise State, Fresno State and Texas-El Paso.

The best non-BCS league could find itself teetering on the edge of existence, or at least relevance.

Big 12: The biggest hit comes if both Colorado (Pac-10) and Missouri (Big Ten) leave.

If Missouri or Colorado leave, the Big 12 would go get TCU from the Mountain West. While that would wound the MWC, the league would most likely then invite Boise State.

If both Colorado and Missouri left, the Big 12 would get TCU and, maybe, Houston? Either way, the Big 12’s TV stature would shrink.

Big East: The league was almost wiped out when the ACC expanded five years ago. What happens if Pittsburgh, Syracuse or Rutgers is taken by the Big Ten?

Most likely the Big East would raid Conference USA for Central Florida. That would get the league further into Florida. UCF is third-largest school in the country (53,000) behind Ohio State and Arizona State. There's got to be some football players in there somewhere. Plus, the school has made a huge commitment to facilities.

Sooner or later doesn’t Big East football and basketball have to split? The unwieldy existence between the two sides (16 teams in basketball, only eight of which play football).

After the wounds caused by the ACC, another hit could cause the end of the Big East in football.

My latest look on how the Big Ten, Pac-10, Big 12 and MWC might look in the future.

BIG TEN 
Schembechler Division

Iowa
Missouri
Michigan
Michigan State
Minnesota
Northwestern

Grange Division
Illinois
Indiana
Ohio State
Penn State
Purdue
Wisconsin

BIG 12
North Division
Nebraska
Colorado
Kansas
Kansas State
Iowa State
TCU

South Division
Texas
Texas Tech
Texas A&M
Oklahoma
Baylor
Oklahoma State

 

PAC-10
North Division
Oregon
Oregon State
Washington State
Cal
Stanford
Washington

South Division
BYU
Utah
Arizona
Arizona State
USC
UCLA

MOUNTAIN WEST
Fresno State
Boise State
Texas-El Paso
Air Force
Wyoming
UNLV
San Diego State
New Mexico
Colorado State

 

 

  •  
Comments

Since: Oct 24, 2007
Posted on: February 11, 2010 7:56 pm
 

More expansion: A proposed new look

Please put a little more consideration in to your re-alingments, Dodd.  Any conference expansion/re-alignment would be based on money and new markets more than "travel partners".

*The Pac 10 would be better off adding Colorado and either BYU or Utah.  This would give them a stronger presence in both Salt Lake City and Denver.  Additionally, Colorado and BYU/Utah wouldn't be inconceivable "travel partners."

*I agree with the Mizzou to Big 10.  This would give them a bigger presence in the Kansas City/St. Louis area.  Adding Pittsburgh wouldn't do much for the Big 10 as they already have a presence in Pennsylvania (Penn State).

*TCU and Houston to the Big XII?!?  The Big XII already has the Texas market covered.  It would make more sense to take the Utah/BYU team that isn't snatched up by the Pac 10.  This would give the Big XII a bigger presence in Salt Lake City.  The 12th team would be a tough choice.  TCU would make sense, but I could see the Big XII making a run for Arkansas.  Fayetteville is closer to most Big XII teams than it is to the SEC teams.  And with TV contracts coming to re-negotiations, it is very possible for the Big XII to work out a monster contract deal or start it's own TV channel and switch to profit sharing like the Big 10 and SEC.  I could see the Arkansas fans loving the opportunity to renew some of it's SWC rivalries.

*In the event Arkansas (I'll admit, very unlikely) should join the Big XII, I could see Miami or Florida State going to the SEC in place of Arksansas.  If an ACC team joins the SEC then I could see the ACC snatching up West Virginia.  This would leave the Big East to snatch up Central Florida or possibly TCU (very far fetched).

*Fresno State and Boise State would then be optimal choices for the MWC, but I don't see the conference receiving an automatic BCS bid even with TCU still in the conference.

The new conferences realignments that I think make more sense:

PAC-10
North Division
Oregon
Oregon State
Washington State
Cal
Stanford
Washington

South Division
Colorado
Utah
Arizona
Arizona State
USC
UCLA


BIG 12
North Division
Nebraska
BYU
Kansas
Kansas State
Iowa State
Arkansas

South Division
Texas
Texas Tech
Texas A&M
Oklahoma
Baylor
Oklahoma State

 

SEC
East Division
Florida
Georgia
Tennessee
Vanderbilt
South Carolina
Florida State

West Division
LSU
Kentucky
Alabama
Auburn
Mississippi
Mississippi State

BIG TEN 
Schembechler Division

Iowa
Missouri
Michigan
Michigan State
Minnesota
Northwestern

Grange Division
Illinois
Indiana
Ohio State
Penn State
Purdue
Wisconsin

MOUNTAIN WEST
Fresno State
Boise State
TCU
Air Force
Wyoming
UNLV
San Diego State
New Mexico
Colorado State

ACC
Atlantic
Clemson
Boston College
Maryland
NC State
Wake Forest
West Virginia

COASTAL
Miami
Virginia Tech
Georgia Tech
North Carolina
Duke
Virginia

BIG EAST
Pittsburgh
Syracuse
South Florida
Central Florida
Cincinnatti
Louisville
Rutgers
Connecticut



Since: May 22, 2008
Posted on: February 11, 2010 6:47 pm
 

More expansion: A proposed new look

If i didn't see the revenue difference between the Big10 and Big12 i would say it would seem like a parallel jump!   However the Money in the Big 10 is soooooooo much more than the Big12.  Texas recieved 12mil last year from the big12 Each Big10 shchool recieved 22Mil in 10yrs that would be 100mil dollars more each that Texas and Missour only got8.5mill.   The Big10 members also are all AAU members the Big12 has only 8 that means the Big12 has 4 universities that are considered 3rd tier!   Bowl Money----Ohio State win over Oregon both Universities recieved 14.5 mil the winner and looser both recieve the same amount.  As a sports fan you should know this!!!!!!!!!!!!



Since: May 22, 2008
Posted on: February 11, 2010 6:32 pm
 

More expansion: A proposed new look

To recieve membership into the Pac10 the said university MUST HAVE ALL TEN vote approval!  BYU couldn't get approved!  Next if a conference is going to add 2 Universities (Pac10) or 1(Big10) The conference WILL NOT expand into it's own footprint.   It's about getting additionl Tv markets into that conferense for TV contracts.  Going with this logic the Pac10 canidates will be 1.Utah 2.Colorado 3.New Mexico 4.Texas A&M 5.Texas.    The Big10 1.Texas 2.Missouri 3.Rutgers 4.Syracuse.   The Big10 has already started the talks with Texas that in itself would put Colorado and Texas A&M on the Table for the Pac10.  IF all this crazy happens than the Big12 would pick up 1.Utah 2. BYU 3. TCU.  Money talks and the Big10 has it!



Since: Sep 15, 2008
Posted on: February 11, 2010 6:16 pm
 

Missouri

Missouri jumps.

If for nothing else the money difference (est to be incr from 6 mil to 22 mil) and the perceived academic prowess.

It's not a lateral move.  Especially with how the BIG 12 distributes TV revenues.



Since: Oct 26, 2008
Posted on: February 11, 2010 5:16 pm
 

More expansion: A proposed new look

Dude.......


because of your anti-B10 bias
Learn some english. Are you saying that he is bias against anti-big ten people? Or are saying in a wierd way that he is bias towards the Big TEN? Maybe you should say "your Big Ten bias" or your anti Big Ten attitude. Just some sugestions, thought you might need some.

Did you pay attension in English class?

hahahahahahahahahaah



Since: Jan 27, 2009
Posted on: February 11, 2010 5:13 pm
 

More expansion: A proposed new look

From what I understand there was actually some anti-LDS sentiment that kept BYU out of the Big 12 when it was originally formed.  A state legislator found out that the Big 12 was going to include BYU and exclude Baylor, so that got nixed. 

Once again, that was the rumor.  But your comment made me remember it because Baylor has just as much business as a TCU or Houston in the Big 12.  At least TCU would compete.  I think BYU fans would love to join the Big 12 North.




Since: Aug 31, 2006
Posted on: February 11, 2010 4:00 pm
 

More expansion: A proposed new look

TCU brings more that football to the table.  The women's basketball and baseball are outstanding and nationally recognized.  TCU has high academic standards and success.  And it adds another draw because of it's locale - dallas/Ft. Worth area which is a strong recruiting area.



Since: Oct 11, 2006
Posted on: February 11, 2010 2:50 pm
 

Good idea, poor design!

Schembechler and Grange divisions SUCK!

Better mixes:

East Division 

  • Michigan
  • Michigan State
  • Indiana
  • Notre Dame
  • Ohio State
  • Penn State

West Division

  • Illinois
  • Iowa
  • Purdue
  • Minnesota
  • Northwestern
  • Wisconsin

OR

North Division

  • Michigan
  • Michigan State
  • Minnesota
  • Northwestern
  • Notre Dame
  • Wisconsin

South Division

  • Illinois
  • Indiana
  • Iowa
  • Ohio State
  • Penn State
  • Purdue

*Pittsburgh can replace Notre Dame.




Since: Sep 15, 2008
Posted on: February 11, 2010 12:57 pm
 

Math

That's 22+ million per team... which bolsters your point. :)

22 mil vs 6 mil....... hmmmmmmmmmmm.



Since: Aug 31, 2006
Posted on: February 11, 2010 12:47 pm
 

PAC10 looking to Texas ....

It seems to me that the PAC10 ought to be looking to the State of Texas.  With 8 or more schools in the State of Texas, it would be easy to get the "in-state rivalry" pair that matches the rest of the PAC10 currently.

Go after Texas Tech and TCU for example.  Texas Tech might be glad to stop being "second fiddle" to the 800 lbs gorilla in Austin.

That gives the PAC10 a nice recruiting foothold in Texas, access to all the bowl games in Texas, access to all the TV in Texas.

Another option might be Texas A&M and TCU, although I think convince TA&M to leave Texas might be harder than convincing Texas Tech.

At worst, you could go after TCU and Houston or SMU.

Given the PAC10 everything they say they looking for ... TV Market, Big Name schools, instate rivalries.


 ------

I think BYU and Utah is the "logical" choice, based on athletics and academics and facilities and geography.  BUT, BYU and Utah have been the "logical" choice for at least the past 10 years, if not longer.  And the PAC10 has never do it.  WHY, because the choice to add BYU and Utah is NOT governed by "logic", it's driven by emotion and bias.  As many have said, certain elements within the PAC10 leadership and especially with the fan base will NEVER allow the conservative schools of Utah and especially BYU into their club.

What has changed relative to institutional and fan distain of BYU in particular and Utah also that would make the PAC10 change their mind about 10 years of saying no.

Dodd, you are dead right that "logically" the PAC10 should add BYU and Utah, but I think you are dead wrong on thinking they will.  They will go after two other teams that are not as logical, such as TTech and TCU or TCU and Houston, but don't have the emotional charge bias against them that BYU and Utah have.


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com