Blog Entry

Texas' decision seems to have calmed realignment

Posted on: June 15, 2010 12:07 am
Edited on: June 15, 2010 8:08 am
 

So that's it?

Really?

Boise State to the Mountain West, Colorado to the Pac-10, and Nebraska to the Big Ten is all we get in what has been described, over and over again throughout the past week, as college athletics' most unstable time in decades? No super conferences? No loss of a conference? If this is really all we get -- plus Utah to the Pac-10, which at the moment seems like the only logical move for commissioner Larry Scott, who wanted a 16-school league but will probably have to settle for Utah making his league a 12-school league -- then color me disappointed, because when this fuse was lit I prepared for the biggest of bangs. Instead, the national landscape hasn't really changed much, and it doesn't look like it will in the immediate future.

It was a bomb scare with no bomb.

It was a tornado watch with no twister.

The recap looks like this: The Big Ten improved with Nebraska. The Pac-10 will be enhanced with Colorado and, presumably, Utah. The Big 12 lost two schools and took a hit, but probably feels great considering how close it was to dissolving. And the Mountain West improved with the addition of Boise State, but could soon be damaged by the loss of Utah, which would then owe Texas a huge smooth.

Isn't that wild?

UT's decision to reject the Pac-10 will likely turn Utah into a "BCS" school.

All together now, Utah fans: Hook'em Horns!

(Note to Utah fans: If you see Vince Young in a strip club, do not fight him.He is your friend. You owe his alma mater.)

Seriously, almost from the start, it was clear Texas was the major player in all this, and that the Longhorns had the power to turn the Pac-10 into the Pac-16 and kill the Big 12, or hold much of the Big 12 together and in the process slow the move toward super conferences, if only temporarily. Ultimately, Texas decided to go with the latter. So now the Big 12 has 10 football-playing schools, the Pac-10 has 11, and the Big Ten has 12.

And nobody has 16.

That's the key.

Massive realignment now seems unlikely this summer.

The fuse was lit.

But Texas turned an expected bang into a minor dud by resisting the urge to go west.
Category: NCAAF
Comments

Since: Feb 11, 2008
Posted on: June 15, 2010 8:21 am
 

Since the Big 12 is now down to 10

Since the Big 12 is down to 10 teams is now time to change its name back to the SOUTHWEST Conference... Lert's not stop there. lets then try to get TCU and Houston back into the conference and start playing some good old fashion Texas Football again....Then the newly form Southwest Conference can then sell the naming rights to the "BiG 12" to the "BiG 10" (which now has 12 teams) for around 100 million dollars or more.





Since: Sep 10, 2007
Posted on: June 15, 2010 8:06 am
 

Who wanted Texas in the Pac-10 anyway?

Who but Larry Scott really wanted Texas and it's fellow Big 12 members in the Pac-10? The Pac-10, first and foremost, prides itself on academic excellence. In that regard, and with apologies to Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech and Texas (and you can throw Texas A&M in there, too), they don't measure up academically to Pac-10 standards, nor are they a good geographical fit. They'd be better suited in an academically inferior conference like the SEC. And, of course, Texas never would've been happy in the Pac-10, not being able to push its weight around like it does in its present conference. Colorado is a good fit, both academically and geographically. I welcome the Buffaloes with open arms. And bring on Utah, BYU and Colorado State to keep the symmetry of the in-state rivalries in the conference intact.



Since: Aug 7, 2008
Posted on: June 15, 2010 7:59 am
 

Texas' decision seems to have calmed realignment

I think the Big 12 should get Memphis and Arkansas. 

Arkansas should be interested becasue they can be a powerhouse in the Big 12 North.  Memphis wants to be in a BCS confrence and they would strengthen the conference basketball-wise.

I dont like the idea of adding more Texas schools, but if Arkansas is impossible to get (and they might be) then we may not have too many other options.



Since: Sep 24, 2006
Posted on: June 15, 2010 7:14 am
 

Texas' decision seems to have calmed realignment

Please tell me how Texas saved the day. What, they got paid a lot in a new Big 12 offer that makes more sense financially and geographically? They get their own TV network? They get to be a top dog in a conference? 
What did Texas do that was so great? 



Since: Apr 17, 2008
Posted on: June 15, 2010 7:12 am
 

Huh?

A tornado with no twister? What the hell does that mean. If it's a tornado..it is a twister. You were going ok with the bomb scare thing, but the twister thing made no sense.



Since: Sep 28, 2007
Posted on: June 15, 2010 6:50 am
 

Texas' decision seems to have calmed realignment

And the Big East just stood there and did nothing proactively to prevent a conference meltdown.  The Big Ten views the Big East as the scrawny the little geeks with pocket protectors and the tape on their glasses happy to turn over their lunch money to anyone who threatens them.  OK, so this time, the Big Ten bullies got a bit distracted when the hot chick in the corn costume blew them a kiss.  But like most bullies, they will have their way with her, slap her around a bit, get drunk with power and look for that geek to kick around.

Big East be warned … this is not over.  The conference is lead by a non-football commissioner whose priority is to protect the interests of the vulnerable Providence, Seton Hall, DePaul, St. John’s, Villanova, Marquette, and Georgetown.  ND does not need protection since they write their own set of rules.  The non-football programs will be weakened with a Big East split, but the football programs will strive by either adding Memphis, Central Florida, East Carolina, etc. or dissolve by moving to other conference powerhouses like the Big Ten, ACC and SEC.  It is time for the Big East to understand that football will pay the bills in the future.




Since: Sep 19, 2007
Posted on: June 15, 2010 5:48 am
 

Texas' decision seems to have calmed realignment

if OU goes to the north they will be playing every other year, so in some cases they might not play at all



Since: Sep 5, 2006
Posted on: June 15, 2010 3:51 am
 

Texas' decision seems to have calmed realignment

Nebraska basketball is on the rise, and Lincoln is building a brand-new, beautiful $350 million dollar arena opening in 2013 that will hold 18,000 fans.  And with being in the Big 10 now -2011, and not having issues like Iowa and Indiana basketball does, I expect my Cornhuskers to do quite well actually! 

Where does WKU play?  Are you the Butler or George Mason or something of that order of the Sun Belt Conference because you got lucky and beat Drake a few years ago?

Save your snide remarks for your hillbilly teams back there in Kentucky!



Since: Sep 18, 2008
Posted on: June 15, 2010 3:37 am
 

Texas' decision seems to have calmed realignment

...and the Big 12 or All-New Big Ten will now become a much stronger basketball conference without the weight of those lead-bottom Nebraska and Colorado RPIs. The Pac-10's RPI couldn't get much worse and the Big Ten won't feel it.



Since: Dec 10, 2008
Posted on: June 15, 2010 3:21 am
 

Texas' decision seems to have calmed realignment

if you listen carefully you can hear the deep sign of relief from the big12 north n baylor because they were having nightmares of playing in the mwc. the 8.6 that they claim the rest will make nebraska will be making more than that at the big10. and texas didnt resist the urge to go west they stand to make more money staying in the big12 and running the show and calling the shots esp with that new network in talks. texas now has the conference to itself and the rest of the big12 north wont complain bc riding texas coattails is better than being in the mwc.


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