Big 10 Expansion Thread -Big Ten ready for a playoff .. finally?

[Noop]

Colorado makes more sense for the Pac-10 then Baylor but I guess Texas is too much of a big fish to ignore. The Mountain West may turn out to be the true winner of all this should this go down as speculated.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

Looks like it will work for the Pac-10 as well.. word out of the meetings this weekend is that the Pac-10 is willing to offer Baylor instead of Colorado.

Some interesting potential scenarios out there for the Big 12 now.

Random thoughts:

--It appears that Nebraska and Missouri have been given ultimatums, complete with deadlines, by the Big 12. That just seems like a bad move for everyone involved. The word has been that, if Nebraska stays, Texas would stay (is the Pac 10 willing to wait on that? Probably, because none of their secondary options like Colorado or Utah are in demand until a few other dominoes fall). On the upside, it could get Nebraska/Mizzou out of their financial/time penalties, but I don't get the feeling that this is going to get the Big Ten to hurry along and make a decision. It is unclear what the ramifications are, if Nebraska and Mizzou don't pledge their undying love (the assumption is that it give the Texas posse an excuse to leave) for the Big 12. What happens if they just respond in the same way that head coaches with wandering eyes do: "We are proud members of the Big 12 and are contractually bound to the conference. No further questions." ?

--the Pac 10 giving up Colorado for Baylor (and Texas Tech) goes to show you just how much pull Texas has, as Colorado probably has the second best media market (behind the state of Texas) of all the teams that have been mentioned in this "merge." Essentially, the Pac 10 sold out completely for Texas and allowed them five tagalongs (even though several of teams have excellent football programs, a number of them are not up to the Pac 10's professed academic standards and it is hard to justify the additional school from Texas or the Oklahoma schools, from a media-standpoint, over Colorado).

--Reaching a little, but if the Texas posse leaves before the Big Ten makes a move, the remaining, old Big 8 schools could end up in a better competitive position and move right back into Texas (and probably weaken Tech, A&M, and Baylor) by adding TCU, Houston, SMU, and UTEP. Even though Texas is ridiculous rich in recruits, doubling the number of in-state BCS schools would almost certainly hurt everyone but the University of Texas. Add in Utah and BYU (and maybe sub out SMU for Tulsa, if SMU is hopeless) and you certainly have a BCS-worthy conference with very good basketball, a good geographic footprint, and some strong markets, as well.

[Swaggs]

Here is what a new Big 12 could look like:

North?:
Iowa State
Missouri
Kansas
KSU
Colorado
Nebraska

Southwest:
Utah
BYU
TCU
UTEP
Houston
Tulsa or SMU

Certainly not as good without the two juggernauts in Oklahoma and Texas, but it kills the MWC and, if Nebraska turns back into Nebraska, it is better than a lot of the existing BCS conferences.

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Some interesting potential scenarios out there for the Big 12 now.

Random thoughts:

--It appears that Nebraska and Missouri have been given ultimatums, complete with deadlines, by the Big 12. That just seems like a bad move for everyone involved. The word has been that, if Nebraska stays, Texas would stay (is the Pac 10 willing to wait on that? Probably, because none of their secondary options like Colorado or Utah are in demand until a few other dominoes fall).

Conventional wisdom is that the Pac-10 would want plans to be finalized by the end of 2010 as their TV deal is due to be renegotiated early in 2011 and the impetus behind all of this is having their own TV network.

[Swaggs]

I kind of glossed over the Pac 10's aspect of this, but I think it is obviously a great move to add two of college football's crown jewel's to their conference and joining them with USC.

I just think leaving Colorado and its market (particularly if Missouri and its market is still around) leaves a glimmer of hope behind for the remaining Big 12teams to survive and potentially thrive.

[I. J. Reilly]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I still don't understand the lure of these mega-conferences. I understand 12 teams, but 16 seems way too much. Not only do teams not play each other in football often, but it seems like it would really hurt rivalries in the conferences.

The idea of conferences for me seemed to be getting a bunch of regional schools of similar ability and creating a great atmosphere for sports. These mega-conferences with no history are boring to me. There are people who like Big East basketball, but I find it sort of dumb that you have teams like South Florida, DePaul, etc. in it just so you can fill it out.

That’s interesting, because I came to the opposite conclusion even though I share view of what makes college sports so great.

As an Oregon Stater I wasn’t real happy with the Pac-12; it would mean an unbalanced schedule and just make it that much harder to win the conference. But with 16 teams it means the current “conference” is essentially intact, it’s just called a division now. But the key point is that we will still be playing the old Pac-8 members every year. For an added $15mil a year or so I think I can deal with the semantics of saying “Division” instead of “Conference.”

[Noop]

I got this from a rivals message board, sounds interesting if not impossible.

An ACC head coach was talking about what he had heard:

-4 16 team conferences, there would be no more B10 B12, etc, they would be called the Midwest, East, etc.

-8 conference games, 3 OOC games against the other conferences and one swing game (I guess this would be like a FCS school, or one of the FBS schools not in the mix)

-Acc schools would have Miami, FSU, Clemson and GT going to what is now known as the SEC, chances are Vandy would not be included, each current conference is going to lose 1-2 schools, so the numbers work, so there will be some sort of minimum requirement.

-WF and Duke would NOT be part of the new alignment for football

-They may indeed operate outside the NCAA

-The TV deal dollars being talked about for this are mind-boggling

-A 4 team playoff that intially would include the top school of each conference, that eventually would evolve into a 16 team playoff.

Take it for what its worth, but thats the footprint as far as this coach was concerned.

[the_meanstrosity]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Some interesting potential scenarios out there for the Big 12 now.

Random thoughts:

--It appears that Nebraska and Missouri have been given ultimatums, complete with deadlines, by the Big 12. That just seems like a bad move for everyone involved. The word has been that, if Nebraska stays, Texas would stay (is the Pac 10 willing to wait on that? Probably, because none of their secondary options like Colorado or Utah are in demand until a few other dominoes fall). On the upside, it could get Nebraska/Mizzou out of their financial/time penalties, but I don't get the feeling that this is going to get the Big Ten to hurry along and make a decision. It is unclear what the ramifications are, if Nebraska and Mizzou don't pledge their undying love (the assumption is that it give the Texas posse an excuse to leave) for the Big 12. What happens if they just respond in the same way that head coaches with wandering eyes do: "We are proud members of the Big 12 and are contractually bound to the conference. No further questions." ?

--the Pac 10 giving up Colorado for Baylor (and Texas Tech) goes to show you just how much pull Texas has, as Colorado probably has the second best media market (behind the state of Texas) of all the teams that have been mentioned in this "merge." Essentially, the Pac 10 sold out completely for Texas and allowed them five tagalongs (even though several of teams have excellent football programs, a number of them are not up to the Pac 10's professed academic standards and it is hard to justify the additional school from Texas or the Oklahoma schools, from a media-standpoint, over Colorado).

--Reaching a little, but if the Texas posse leaves before the Big Ten makes a move, the remaining, old Big 8 schools could end up in a better competitive position and move right back into Texas (and probably weaken Tech, A&M, and Baylor) by adding TCU, Houston, SMU, and UTEP. Even though Texas is ridiculous rich in recruits, doubling the number of in-state BCS schools would almost certainly hurt everyone but the University of Texas. Add in Utah and BYU (and maybe sub out SMU for Tulsa, if SMU is hopeless) and you certainly have a BCS-worthy conference with very good basketball, a good geographic footprint, and some strong markets, as well.

I believe the reason for the pledge to the Big 12 is so that Beebe can then go ahead and start making their new TV deal with Fox. I honestly don't know what their move is if MU and NU don't agree to make the pledge. Do you kick them out? Do you reduce their conference revenue? If MU and NU do give their pledge then I believe the conference will make it tougher financially to leave the conference with various penalties. I'm just really interested to see how the Big 12 enforces this pledge.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by the_meanstrosity

I believe the reason for the pledge to the Big 12 is so that Beebe can then go ahead and start making their new TV deal with Fox. I honestly don't know what their move is if MU and NU don't agree to make the pledge. Do you kick them out? Do you reduce their conference revenue? If MU and NU do give their pledge then I believe the conference will make it tougher financially to leave the conference with various penalties. I'm just really interested to see how the Big 12 enforces this pledge.

You have to assume that Texas and co. are willing to stay, if Nebraska and MU pledge, for it to begin to make any sense (or that the other ten schools made their "pledge" at the meetings). Even assuming that, it stinks of such desperation that I cannot wait to hear how the two schools respond (or if they just fail to acknowlege it beyond a curt "We are proud, charter members of the Big 12, etc.").

It screws the Big 12 because they are leaving if offered -- the money is just too good and this may give them some legal grounds to settle for less than the number of years and money in the required exit fee. And it screws any leverage Nebraska and Mizzou might have with the Big Ten -- they may end up getting provisional offers or something where they do not get full profit shares for a number of years or no offer at all. And, in that case, the Big 12 is never going to be a happy family.

[the_meanstrosity]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

You have to assume that Texas and co. are willing to stay, if Nebraska and MU pledge, for it to begin to make any sense (or that the other ten schools made their "pledge" at the meetings). Even assuming that, it stinks of such desperation that I cannot wait to hear how the two schools respond (or if they just fail to acknowlege it beyond a curt "We are proud, charter members of the Big 12, etc.").

It screws the Big 12 because they are leaving if offered -- the money is just too good and this may give them some legal grounds to settle for less than the number of years and money in the required exit fee. And it screws any leverage Nebraska and Mizzou might have with the Big Ten -- they may end up getting provisional offers or something where they do not get full profit shares for a number of years or no offer at all. And, in that case, the Big 12 is never going to be a happy family.

I think so long as one of the two remains, the Texas schools will stay committed to the Big 12. If both go then you're right we'll likely see the south division move to greener pastures.

If they fail to make the pledge then I'm guessing we'll see penalties of some sort. The Presidents of the other 10 schools are supposedly backing this so I'm guessing they have something planned if the pledge isn't made. And the conference is likely fractured at that point so they could go as extreme as they want to.

It's an aggressive play by the Big 12. One that could either destroy the conference or bring it back together. But that's probably what is needed at this point.

[the_meanstrosity]

Originally Posted by Noop

I got this from a rivals message board, sounds interesting if not impossible.

An ACC head coach was talking about what he had heard:

-4 16 team conferences, there would be no more B10 B12, etc, they would be called the Midwest, East, etc.

-8 conference games, 3 OOC games against the other conferences and one swing game (I guess this would be like a FCS school, or one of the FBS schools not in the mix)

-Acc schools would have Miami, FSU, Clemson and GT going to what is now known as the SEC, chances are Vandy would not be included, each current conference is going to lose 1-2 schools, so the numbers work, so there will be some sort of minimum requirement.

-WF and Duke would NOT be part of the new alignment for football

-They may indeed operate outside the NCAA

-The TV deal dollars being talked about for this are mind-boggling

-A 4 team playoff that intially would include the top school of each conference, that eventually would evolve into a 16 team playoff.

Take it for what its worth, but thats the footprint as far as this coach was concerned.

I definitely see this is as the replacement for the NCAA in the future. I think once the "super conferences" are created the next logical step is to unify and create a national presence. I will be very interested to see how the government reacts to something like this.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by the_meanstrosity

It's an aggressive play by the Big 12. One that could either destroy the conference or bring it back together. But that's probably what is needed at this point.

I'm not sure what "the Big 12" is at this point. If the deadline was given, we don't know who gave it. The articles I've read is that this wasn't a formal vote or delivered in a group meeting, rather that the schools were given the deadline separately.

The commissioner has largely been a puppet for Texas and the south schools. I'm convinced the meltdown on Thursday was because Texas has been telling Beebe all along that they are in the Big 12 all the way and backing him to play tough with MU and NU and then he finds out they are talking with the Pac 10 behind his back.

The "or else" in the ultimatum given to NU and MU is that if those schools don't pledge their undying commitment by Friday, Texas and their friends are going to the Pac 10. If takes 9 votes to kick a team out of the Big 12, and MU and NU aren't going to vote to kick each other out. All they need is two schools to stand by their side and the Big 12 can't punish them.

I remain convinced Texas will do what is best for Texas regardless of what the Big Ten does. I do think staying in the Big 12 is good for Texas because it will let them get their conference money and launch a viable network. I don't think the Pac 10 will let Texas have the freedom the Big 12 does.

The idea that Texas and the the other five schools are going to based their decision on what Nebraska does insults our intelligence. It's a bluff and gamesmanship.

I still think we will probably have resolution by July 1. If no one makes a move by then, it gets very difficult to have realignment in place by the 2011-12 school year.

[sooner333]

If NU, MU, and the South knew that they were leaving, could they vote to have the penalties for leaving reduced or eliminated?

[cuervo72]

The superconference sounds like what I floated in another of these threads. 64 teams that can play for their own championship(s) and just exclude the other schools. Forget BCS busters, they're not in the conference they're not even part of the system.

[DeToxRox]

I really wonder what the hell the Big 10 does now, assuming that this deadline to Nebraska and Missouri is legit. Obviously Delaney wanted to move at a methodical pace (kinda like Big 10 football players amirite? Sorry, had to before someone else did) but that really isn't much of an option now. I don't think the Big 10 will let the Big 12 dictate what they do but the time frame is going to have to move up out of necessity. I wonder if the Big East is next to make these ultimatums, it'd only make sense.

This whole thing is just moving at an insane speed. It's crazy.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by sooner333

If NU, MU, and the South knew that they were leaving, could they vote to have the penalties for leaving reduced or eliminated?

Hard to pay penalties to a conference that dissolves, the penalties only come into play if the Big 12 continues existence beyond whenever teams leave, which right now is up in the air.

[Swaggs]

The beauty of the Big Ten's position is that they don't have to do anything until they make the call.

They can sit tight at 11 or wait and see how things shake out because none of the Big East schools or Notre Dame are going anywhere (now that the ACC has a new deal) else and it is tough to envision Nebraska or Missouri going anywhere else. Colorado, who we all assumed would be headed to the Pac 10 regardless, may become a more legitimate candidate with their combination of market, academics, and geographic fit.

Texas is really the only opportunity lost and, from the looks of it, the reason is clear. If they come, they are bringing 3-5 of their friends to the party.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Hard to pay penalties to a conference that dissolves, the penalties only come into play if the Big 12 continues existence beyond whenever teams leave, which right now is up in the air.

Iowa State is envisioning a room full of gold coins, to swim in, like Scrooge McDuck.

[Wolfpack]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

The beauty of the Big Ten's position is that they don't have to do anything until they make the call.

They can sit tight at 11 or wait and see how things shake out because none of the Big East schools or Notre Dame are going anywhere (now that the ACC has a new deal) else and it is tough to envision Nebraska or Missouri going anywhere else. Colorado, who we all assumed would be headed to the Pac 10 regardless, may become a more legitimate candidate with their combination of market, academics, and geographic fit.

Texas is really the only opportunity lost and, from the looks of it, the reason is clear. If they come, they are bringing 3-5 of their friends to the party.

Actually, I don't think the ACC or ESPN has ever "officially" signed the contract that was much-reported, but it was taken as fact that they did. It was always "reportedly" or the sides "were close", but I don't ever remember seeing anything that made it official.

Regardless, if the ACC and/or ESPN had any sense in negotiations knowing that the Big 10 was looking at expansion during that time, there would likely have to be some kind of language that covers expansion/contraction of the ACC (either automatic enlargement or reduction of money paid out or voiding the contract entirely and re-starting negotiations). If there isn't, then they're both stupid, especially ESPN, if they risked laying out all that money for a league that has a small chance of being raided for its "star" football members within two years of the deal starting.

[Solecismic]

Interesting. Dominoes are falling all over the place.

I wouldn't want to be in Kansas or Colorado right now. Texas going west causes them a lot of harm.

Question being whether there's enough leftover material for a 16-team new-NCAA conference from what the four new majors leave behind.

The ACC probably has to stick near the Atlantic coast, scooping up what's left of the Big East. Possibly content to stick with 12 teams.

It could then form an alliance with a modified 14-school MWC. Those two conferences could feed the fourth semi-final slot of a new football tournament.

New MWC: Air Force, Boise State, Brigham Young, Colorado, Colorado State, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Nevada-Las Vegas, New Mexico, San Diego State, Texas Christian, Utah, Wyoming.

You could throw in some Rice and some Nevada-Reno to reach 16.

The Big Ten has some interesting choices available if the SEC is talking expansion and Texas is not part of those plans. Maryland is no longer that much of a long shot. Notre Dame is probably wavering. Waiting still is to their benefit. If I'm Delany, I offer Nebraska now, and indicate a move to 16 is "being studied." This pre-empts the SEC or the Pac Ten limiting the Big Ten by taking Nebraska.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

There's some people giving Pac 10 leadership and Big 12 leadership FAR too much credit. Texas is making all these moves. They're the ones that approached the Pac 10 about bringing 6 teams to the conference. They're the ones that pushed for the 'ultimatum' which is basically designed to make Texas not be the bad guy if they act first.

Mizzou's not pledging anything because they've already got an informal invite. The key will be whether Nebraska's willing to take a leap of faith or not. Knowing Osborne, he's not about to pledge anything given that Texas is the one pulling the strings. Osborne would rather tell Dodds to go F himself.

[Blade6119]

Dont get me wrong, because I understand they have a historically great football team, but what makes Nebraska so appealing to the Big 10? It doesnt have the media markets a Mizzou or Rutgers offers. It doesnt have the national fan base a ND offers, or the geographic rivalry a Pitt offers. Why is Nebraska more appealing then a Kansas, who has an elite basketball program and is prob better in football then nebraska is in basketball...most of the other rumors or options for all the conference make sense to me, but I dont get why Nebraska is being viewed as a gem in these scenarios. What does Nebraska add to the Big 10 that is more valuable then what the other options offer, because i just dont see the Big 10 taking nebraska and its football tradition over a Rutgers who theoretically opens the big 10 network up to the NYC area

[sooner333]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

There's some people giving Pac 10 leadership and Big 12 leadership FAR too much credit. Texas is making all these moves. They're the ones that approached the Pac 10 about bringing 6 teams to the conference. They're the ones that pushed for the 'ultimatum' which is basically designed to make Texas not be the bad guy if they act first.

Mizzou's not pledging anything because they've already got an informal invite. The key will be whether Nebraska's willing to take a leap of faith or not. Knowing Osborne, he's not about to pledge anything given that Texas is the one pulling the strings. Osborne would rather tell Dodds to go F himself.

I don't think the Big 12 leadership is getting any credit. Beebe is the one who is letting the house of cards fall down hard. The Pac Ten has an opportunity to get things done and they are doing it. The South schools (and CU) have no reason to wait around and let Missouri and Nebraska make a decision because they are put in a pinch if they leave. So, they need to know what's going to happen so they can make a move. If Missouri and Nebraska go to the Big Ten, fine. But we need to know if the Big 12 can survive or not, and if not, move on accordingly.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

The Big Ten has some interesting choices available if the SEC is talking expansion and Texas is not part of those plans. Maryland is no longer that much of a long shot. Notre Dame is probably wavering. Waiting still is to their benefit. If I'm Delany, I offer Nebraska now, and indicate a move to 16 is "being studied." This pre-empts the SEC or the Pac Ten limiting the Big Ten by taking Nebraska.

The SEC's tact appears to be defensive at this point, locking up markets that may be of interest to the Big Televen. This may seem silly, but the reasoning seems to be that they could lock up a whole region for a full day of network games (Noon, 3:30, 7:45), that may be just as good or better than expanding to new markets.

If the Big Ten went south into the ACC, then the SEC might be dealing with divided viewership, which drives the value of their deal down.

[vex]

Orangebloods.com - Pac-10 ready to make moves; Nebraska's decision is key

[molson]

Maybe these conferences should all merge and just become one mega-super-giant conference, with regional divisions based on historic rivalries. All outside the NCAA.

[the_meanstrosity]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Dont get me wrong, because I understand they have a historically great football team, but what makes Nebraska so appealing to the Big 10? It doesnt have the media markets a Mizzou or Rutgers offers. It doesnt have the national fan base a ND offers, or the geographic rivalry a Pitt offers. Why is Nebraska more appealing then a Kansas, who has an elite basketball program and is prob better in football then nebraska is in basketball...most of the other rumors or options for all the conference make sense to me, but I dont get why Nebraska is being viewed as a gem in these scenarios. What does Nebraska add to the Big 10 that is more valuable then what the other options offer, because i just dont see the Big 10 taking nebraska and its football tradition over a Rutgers who theoretically opens the big 10 network up to the NYC area

I'm guessing Nebraska will have a much easier time leaving the Big 12 vs Kansas. Right now it's still an unknown if the Kansas Board of Regents will allow Kansas and KSU to split. I've seen it posted that one Regent member has already suggested that schools don't need to be in a major conference to be good. And he's right based on sport to sport, but it's a lot easier to be good when you have that extra revenue from a major conference tv contract. And Nebraska also has a nice national following from their glory days so that counts for something. They may not have the state population that others do in the Big 12, but they have a strong national fan base.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

There's some people giving Pac 10 leadership and Big 12 leadership FAR too much credit. Texas is making all these moves. They're the ones that approached the Pac 10 about bringing 6 teams to the conference. They're the ones that pushed for the 'ultimatum' which is basically designed to make Texas not be the bad guy if they act first.

What are you talking about? It was stated long before in this thread that the PAC-10 approached Texas about possibly expanding. I even think you made a comment about how the PAC-10 was foolish for chasing Texas after they turned the Big-10 down. The PAC-10 was expanding with or without Texas. To say the PAC-10 shouldnt get too much credit is ignorant at best.

[DeToxRox]

Apparently there was a 4.5 hour meeting amongst Big 10 school representatives and Notre Dame's AD at some point this weekend. No idea what, if anything, comes of this but obviously it is interesting timing.

[DeToxRox]

So here is something from an apparently connected writer on Texas Tech's Rival site. He initially broke the Mike Leach being fired story FWIW:

At this point I think you are looking at 70/30 odds that it does happen.

Nebraska wants out.

Missouri wants out.

The Pac 10 commish wants the Big 12 South schools and has been given clearance to move forward.

Deciding on taking Colorado, Baylor or Oklahoma State can all be worked through and is not an issue for the Pac 10.

Kevin Weiberg is ready to put together a major television network starting next summer that will make everyone involved a ton of money.

It all points one way right now so 70/30 could even be a bit conservative.

Not much that is new but obviously he seems to feel good about it.

[DeToxRox]

Also here is the story regarding a meeting today between the Big Ten school presidents and Notre Dame's AD:

PARK RIDGE, Ill. — The Big Ten did not take formal action during a meeting Sunday about conference expansion, although officials say their timeline may change after the Pac-10 revealed plans for their own expansion.
The 11 school presidents and chancellors along with Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick met for about 4½ hours, and Big Ten commissioner Jim Delaney said the majority of time was spent on expansion dialogue.
Michigan State President Lou Anna K. Simon emphasized that academics would play a large role in determining what schools would be a good fit to join the Big Ten — not just athletics.
The Big Ten has been examining possible conference expansion since December.

Interesting that the AD is handling this from ND's end. Might not mean much but who truly knows? The fact they met for 4.5 hours indicates that ND is obviously giving this some serious consideration, if this is all true of course.

[Eaglesfan27]

Word on the USC site is also that the Pac-10 Commish has been given full authority to extend invitations as of today.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

Also here is the story regarding a meeting today between the Big Ten school presidents and Notre Dame's AD:

Needless to say, that piqued our interest. So we sent an email to several people at Notre Dame. Here's the response to the Twitter post in question, courtesy of Brian Hardin, the Irish's Director of Football Media Relations:

Hi John,

Thanks for the email. I think the 150 people that attended the graduation open house of Jack Swarbrick's son today in Indianapolis would help me deny that Jack was in attendance at the Big Ten meetings today in Chicago. I hate to have to throw cold water on yet another "report" regarding Notre Dame and the Big Ten, but like many "reports" before this one, there isn't any validity to it. Feel free to quote me on any of this.


So, there you have it. Notre Dame's athletic director was not at the Big Ten meeting this afternoon.

Irish's Swarbrick at Big Ten meetings today -- not | CollegeFootballTalk.com

[sooner333]

Maybe the six schools moving to the Pac Ten want to work together with Nebraska or Missouri to move at the same time. According to a NY Times article, NCAA bylaws require a conference to have six or more teams who have played together for five years. If the six bolt to the Pac 10 and then either Mizzou or Nebraska leave, that means that there is no more Big 12.

[RainMaker]

College sports sites are worse than tabloid sites in terms of accuracy. If only I had a nickel for every time I read "my source who is never wrong about this stuff says" and it turns up wrong.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by sooner333

Maybe the six schools moving to the Pac Ten want to work together with Nebraska or Missouri to move at the same time. According to a NY Times article, NCAA bylaws require a conference to have six or more teams who have played together for five years. If the six bolt to the Pac 10 and then either Mizzou or Nebraska leave, that means that there is no more Big 12.

The Big East lost VPI, Miami, Boston College, and Temple -- leaving them with only WVU, Pitt, Syracuse and Rutgers who had been together for 5+ years (they added Cincy, Louisville, USF and UConn moved up). Although, they had the basketball schools, too.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

Word on the USC site is also that the Pac-10 Commish has been given full authority to extend invitations as of today.

USC site has been reading http://twitter.com/schadjoe

[SirFozzie]

Here's an interesting article about the four options that the Pac 10 has on board.

Scott cleared to move on Pac-10 expansion, force Big Ten hustle - Dr. Saturday - NCAAF* - Yahoo! Sports

Scott spoke following the conclusion of the conference meetings in San Francisco on Sunday. Earlier in the day, he addressed the chancellors and presidents about possible expansion and was given authority to move ahead without having to go back to the board for approval.

• Retaining the current 10-team structure, unchanged since Arizona and Arizona State joined the Pac-8 in 1978;
• Adding Colorado and Utah to form a 12-team conference with two six-team divisions and a championship game, a la the SEC, Big 12 and ACC;
• Brokering a merger with six Big 12 schools, as reported by Orangebloods on Thursday, as long as one of those schools is Texas; or
• Brokering a full merger with the entire Big 12, creating an unwieldy, 22-team behemoth that would completely redefine the concept of a "conference" in college sports.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

LOL. One of the Mizzou fanboards has a 'Ultimatum Clock' ticking away with a graphic showing the Mizzou logo with a sniper crosshair on it. Too funny.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Good article discussing the inept decisions by Big 12 Commish that lead to the large-scale transformation of college athletics that is about to take place.

Big 12 blew it by eschewing playoff - College Football - Rivals.com

[timmynausea]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

The Big East lost VPI, Miami, Boston College, and Temple -- leaving them with only WVU, Pitt, Syracuse and Rutgers who had been together for 5+ years (they added Cincy, Louisville, USF and UConn moved up). Although, they had the basketball schools, too.

That was the only reason the Big East didn't split into two conferences after the raid. Sticking with the basketball only schools allowed the football schools to keep their auto bid.

[Ksyrup]

If holy hell breaks out among all the conferences, would the ACC basketball schools consider an alignment with the Big East basketball schools? If the ACC loses FSU, GT, Clemson, and UM/VT, say, my guess is turning back to a basketball-first conference is the only chance the ACC has of remaining viable.

[I. J. Reilly]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Good article discussing the inept decisions by Big 12 Commish that lead to the large-scale transformation of college athletics that is about to take place.

Big 12 blew it by eschewing playoff - College Football - Rivals.com

You’re going to have to explain a few things from this “good article” for me.

How exactly does the extra revenue from a hypothetical playoff change anything that is going on now?
You could hand every D1 football school in the country a $100mil check tomorrow and nothing would change. The Big12 North schools would still be at a disadvantage to the South schools, and the Pac-10 would still be at a disadvantage to the Big-10 and SEC. That’s what’s driving this; revenue as it relates to the competition, not real dollars.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

If holy hell breaks out among all the conferences, would the ACC basketball schools consider an alignment with the Big East basketball schools? If the ACC loses FSU, GT, Clemson, and UM/VT, say, my guess is turning back to a basketball-first conference is the only chance the ACC has of remaining viable.

If the holy hell doesn't include shifting of Big East schools to the Big Ten, I think the more likely scenario would be for Rutgers, UConn, Pitt and Syracuse to join the ACC which would be a pretty solid top to bottom but unspectacular football conference and would be excellent for basketball as well.

If it does, I've read that the ACC would look to add Atlantic 10 schools to fill out the basketball side.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by I. J. Reilly

You’re going to have to explain a few things from this “good article” for me.

How exactly does the extra revenue from a hypothetical playoff change anything that is going on now?
You could hand every D1 football school in the country a $100mil check tomorrow and nothing would change. The Big12 North schools would still be at a disadvantage to the South schools, and the Pac-10 would still be at a disadvantage to the Big-10 and SEC. That’s what’s driving this; revenue as it relates to the competition, not real dollars.

It's a fair point. There will never be enough dollars to go around.

[timmynausea]

Originally Posted by Logan

If the holy hell doesn't include shifting of Big East schools to the Big Ten, I think the more likely scenario would be for Rutgers, UConn, Pitt and Syracuse to join the ACC which would be a pretty solid top to bottom but unspectacular football conference and would be excellent for basketball as well.

If it does, I've read that the ACC would look to add Atlantic 10 schools to fill out the basketball side.

If the ACC loses 3 or 4 of its best football programs, I'd think WVU adding a quality basketball and football program to the mix would carry more value than potentially any of those schools. It'd be a much different situation than the Big Ten expansion, which values the potential of Rutgers and UConn as a means to get its quality product (BTN) into big markets. In this scenario, the ACC would be scrambling to add quality IMO.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by timmynausea

If the ACC loses 3 or 4 of its best football programs, I'd think WVU adding a quality basketball and football program to the mix would carry more value than potentially any of those schools. It'd be a much different situation than the Big Ten expansion, which values the potential of Rutgers and UConn as a means to get its quality product (BTN) into big markets. In this scenario, the ACC would be scrambling to add quality IMO.

100% agree, I guess I overlooked the actual schools Ksyrup mentioned...I had seen some speculation that the SEC would pull WVU in as part of the expansion. I wasn't considering them as a potential option in that example, but yes.

I've said it a few times, I'd love Rutgers joining the Big 10 for the revenue and general prestige aspects of the conference but with the most likely second option being an expanded, east-coast ACC/football Big East combination (as opposed to toiling away in the current BE setup) I would be fully on board.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Heard today that Mizzou and Nebraska plan on doing absolutely nothing in regards to the 'ultimatum' by the conferences. Both schools have been privately guaranteed that if the Texas 6 (new nickname evidently) head for the Pac-10, MU and NU will receive bids to the Big 10. Even more interesting, they've also been told that if that occurs, Notre Dame will accept a bid and the Big Ten will expand to 16 teams, grabbing two other Big East teams to fill out the league. Crazy stuff.

[vex]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Heard today that Mizzou and Nebraska plan on doing absolutely nothing in regards to the 'ultimatum' by the conferences. Both schools have been privately guaranteed that if the Texas 6 (new nickname evidently) head for the Pac-10, MU and NU will receive bids to the Big 10. Even more interesting, they've also been told that if that occurs, Notre Dame will accept a bid and the Big Ten will expand to 16 teams, grabbing two other Big East teams to fill out the league. Crazy stuff.

So what Notre Dame has been waiting for all these years is Nebraska and Mizzou?

[Kodos]

Everybody wants a piece of Mizzou! Missouri loves company, after all.