Realignment

[Mexmustang]

Unfortunately, until we put together some real good years, we really aren't up for consideration. The only conference we need to watch is the Big East, for there lies the future of Conference USA and our eastern division.

[Samurai Stang]

Hope you're right, mr. pony. I don't see it but I'm way out here on the left coast & you're there.

Personally, I just wish the presidents & the NCAA would do what's right & put the ##$#@@ bcs-BS cartel out of its misery!

I unfortunately do not share mr. pony's enthusiasm. There are a number of scenarios, all of which now hang on the Big 10. The Big 10 is strongly rumored to be looking at expanding by up to three schools. If, for example, the Big 10 adds Missouri, Pitt, and Rutgers, then the Big East may need to expand to 12 in order to maintain its AQ status. In this case, the Big East may be forced to expand west.

This is but one of a number of possibilities, but with the potential degree of movement, one cannot simply assume the best or the worst.

[Samurai Stang]

Unfortunately, until we put together some real good years, we really aren't up for consideration. The only conference we need to watch is the Big East, for there lies the future of Conference USA and our eastern division.

Only the SEC and ACC are stable. All other conferences will either bolster their ranks or feel the wrath of defection. The Big 12 is the conference to observe, what as it will be the target of the newest raids. It is simply a matter of how many clans it will lose. SMU's future involves far more than the Big East.

[PonyKai]

Unfortunately, until we put together some real good years, we really aren't up for consideration. The only conference we need to watch is the Big East, for there lies the future of Conference USA and our eastern division.

Yes we are up for consideration. In no way does that mean it will happen, but when the chips fall SMU will be in play.

[couch 'em]

Some of you guys don't seem to realize how well connected certain persons associated with SMU are. Once the certain persons preventing us from improving football became a non factor a few years ago, these people started doing their thing. Good times are ahead baring a few doomsday scenarios.

[huskerpony]

The Big 12 is the conference to observe, what as it will be the target of the newest raids. It is simply a matter of how many clans it will lose.

Actually, it is unlikely that the Big 12 loses anyone--although if it does, that is when major shifting occurs. Mizzou will go if they are offered the Big 10, but they are the bottom of the Big 10 wish list. CU probably doesn't have the money to leave, even if they wanted to (and I see no indication that they want to.)

A couple of articles this week pointed out that the Big 12 requires a team to stay for 2 years before they can leave, and they must give up 50% of their revenue share during those 2 years. If Colorado is so broke they can't even fire their coach, I doubt they can afford to give up half their tv revenue for 2 years without a really good deal. Pac-10 TV contracts are worth less than half of the crappy Big 12 contracts. That means it is highly unlikely the Pac-10 could get the money needed to lure CU (who actually does fairly well as far as tv revenue with all their weeknight games.)

UT, OU, NU all stay put unless a major shift occurs. (ie: Big 10 goes to 16 or something)

The Big 12 and Pac-10 have talked about making a joint Big 12/Pac-10 Network. I think this is the most likely scenario. Then a Pac-10 raid of the Big 12 becomes moot because they don't add to their TV market. If they still want to expand and add a championship game at that point, they would be better off to steal from the MWC or WAC in an area that they don't already have a TV market locked down.

[Ponyx2]

Some of you guys don't seem to realize how well connected certain persons associated with SMU are. Once the certain persons preventing us from improving football became a non factor a few years ago, these people started doing their thing. Good times are ahead baring a few doomsday scenarios.

Bush is behind it. Don't want to spill the beans, but he's assigned it to [deleted] Cheney and it involves waterboarding some BCS-types.

[ponyinNC]

Some of you guys don't seem to realize how well connected certain persons associated with SMU are. Once the certain persons preventing us from improving football became a non factor a few years ago, these people started doing their thing. Good times are ahead baring a few doomsday scenarios.

Bush is behind it. Don't want to spill the beans, but he's assigned it to [deleted] Cheney and it involves waterboarding some BCS-types.

Post of the year...well done, Ponyx2!!

[Samurai Stang]

The Big 12 is the conference to observe, what as it will be the target of the newest raids. It is simply a matter of how many clans it will lose.

Actually, it is unlikely that the Big 12 loses anyone--although if it does, that is when major shifting occurs. Mizzou will go if they are offered the Big 10, but they are the bottom of the Big 10 wish list. CU probably doesn't have the money to leave, even if they wanted to (and I see no indication that they want to.)

The Colorado Athletic Director speaking about his "commitment" to the Big 12 while continuing to leave the door open to leaving. Colorado was almost a member of the Pac-10 once before.
http://adrenalinmarketing.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/chase_and_sanborn_ad1.jpg

The Missouri governor states that they should heed the words of the Big 10
http://adrenalinmarketing.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/chase_and_sanborn_ad1.jpg

It is not just the Missouri governor that feels this way, though, as many at the state university are of the same mind.
http://campuscorner.kansascity.com/node/571

The Nebraska Athletic Director stated that he too would listen to the Big 10.
http://www.examiner.com/x-30425-College-Football-Examiner~y2010m2d16-Nebraska-Tom-Osborne-would-listen-to-Big-Ten

Your notion that the Pac-10 would ever consider a WAC team is comical. Boise State is the only WAC team that could even remotely be considered, and they are nowhere near meeting the Pac-10's academic requirements, which is but one of a number of issues they face.

Rather than continue discuss the numerous reasons why the Big 12 is not nearly as stable as you think it is, I shall focus on the single greatest flaw in your argument.

The Big 12 and Pac-10 have talked about making a joint Big 12/Pac-10 Network. I think this is the most likely scenario. Then a Pac-10 raid of the Big 12 becomes moot because they don't add to their TV market.

Your proposal of a peaceful solution reminds me of another time for America. Such a television network might seem like a pleasant solution in which the status quo is preserved, but therein lies the problem. A shared network means shared revenue. With its own network, the Big 10 is infinitely more attractive than any conference that cannot sustain a network on its own.

Conference expansion is a war. Territory is gained and lost. Your shared network concept is the greatest argument I have heard yet that would support teams defecting to the Big 10.

[ponyinNC]

You should read Sun Tzu "The Art Of Conference Realignment".

[Dwan]

One of the things I love about this board is that a lot of it's members' knowledge of the college football landscape died when SMU football died in the early 80s. Here are the facts.

The Pac-10 IS going to expand. The guy they hired as the new commish was hired to increase awareness and increase revenue. Couple that with the Big-10 expanding and adding a championship game, the Pac-10 has no choice and will add two more teams. Their dream would be Utah and Colorado. Decent TV markets, decent teams in the revenue sports, both fit academically and culturally with the Pac-10. If they can't get Colorado, they will take BYU. And they will have no problem getting Utah or BYU and have an excellent shot at getting Colorado.

It is a fact that Colorado will take a long hard look at the Pac-10 and it is a move that makes sense for them. The can recruit more compeitively with the Pac-10 and the majority of their alumni are from the Pac-10 area. Darian Hagan, Eric Bienemey, Rashan Salamon.....aka their of their best players ever from their best days in the late 80s and 90s....all from southern california.

So CU seriously looking at the PAC-10 has made Texas be proactive. Texas is a huge get for anybody. The own the DFW, Houston, and SA TV markets, have top 10 football and basketball....so they are saying, we want t be the ones who determine expansion. If CU leaves....we want a say it it....they basically are saying to the Big 12....no movement with out us and if there is movement without us, we are going to move.

[East Coast Mustang]

One of the things I love about this board is that a lot of it's members' knowledge of the college football landscape died when SMU football died in the early 80s. Here are the facts.

The Pac-10 IS going to expand. The guy they hired as the new commish was hired to increase awareness and increase revenue. Couple that with the Big-10 expanding and adding a championship game, the Pac-10 has no choice and will add two more teams. Their dream would be Utah and Colorado. Decent TV markets, decent teams in the revenue sports, both fit academically and culturally with the Pac-10. If they can't get Colorado, they will take BYU. And they will have no problem getting Utah or BYU and have an excellent shot at getting Colorado.

It is a fact that Colorado will take a long hard look at the Pac-10 and it is a move that makes sense for them. The can recruit more compeitively with the Pac-10 and the majority of their alumni are from the Pac-10 area. Darian Hagan, Eric Bienemey, Rashan Salamon.....aka their of their best players ever from their best days in the late 80s and 90s....all from southern california.

So CU seriously looking at the PAC-10 has made Texas be proactive. Texas is a huge get for anybody. The own the DFW, Houston, and SA TV markets, have top 10 football and basketball....so they are saying, we want t be the ones who determine expansion. If CU leaves....we want a say it it....they basically are saying to the Big 12....no movement with out us and if there is movement without us, we are going to move.

I see what you're saying, but as someone said earlier, Texas won't go anywhere without A&M because the state pols won't allow it- just like back during the last wave of conference realignments when former VA Gov.Mark Warner pretty much insisted to UVA President John Casteen that Va. Tech be included in ACC expansion (the original plan was for Syracuse, BC, and Miami to go to the ACC). You think Rick Perry is going to let A&M get left out in the cold? Would the Pac-10 add Texas and A&M? It's not a perfect marriage geographically (far from it, no pun intended), but then again neither is the Big 12 as its currently constructed.

[East Coast Mustang]

Think about a "Pac-12" with this setup:

South- Texas, Texas A&M, Arizona, ASU, USC, UCLA
North- Oregon, Oregon St., Cal, Stanford, Washington, WSU

Yea, it's a geographical nightmare, but the influx of money from bolstered TV contracts could soften the blow.

[HB Pony Dad]

Think about a "Pac-12" with this setup:

South- Texas, Texas A&M, Arizona, ASU, USC, UCLA
North- Oregon, Oregon St., Cal, Stanford, Washington, WSU

Yea, it's a geographical nightmare, but the influx of money from bolstered TV contracts could soften the blow.

NO!

Perhaps:

South- USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Arizona, ASU,
North- Oregon, Oregon St., Washington, WSU, Utah, Colorado

But lots of reasons against Pac10 realignment...
Most compelling is the fact that to win Pac-10 now, every team must play every other team in the conference. This will stop with expansion and a Championship(?) Game.

Unfortunately due to the B(c)S everybody is too concerned about the $$$ and not College Football!

With a real playoff all this nonsense (other than Pitt to Big Televen) puts proposed College (can we all say: Professional) Super Conferences to the dustbin where they truly belong!

[East Coast Mustang]

NO!

Perhaps:

South- USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Arizona, ASU,
North- Oregon, Oregon St., Washington, WSU, Utah, Colorado

But lots of reasons against Pac10 realignment...
Most compelling is the fact that to win Pac-10 now, every team must play every other team in the conference. This will stop with expansion and a Championship(?) Game.

Unfortunately due to the B(c)S everybody is too concerned about the $$$ and not College Football!

With a real playoff all this nonsense (other than Pitt to Big Televen) puts proposed College (can we all say: Professional) Super Conferences to the dustbin where they truly belong!

I agree, I'd love for the Pac-10 to keep ten teams the traditional way. As an SEC fan, I wish we had the round-robin style that the Pac 10 does in football. Unfortunately, money is the main consideration these days and as a result it looks like the Pac-12 is in our future.