PonyFans.com

The attached message triggered several questions for this board and its "thought leaders":

1) I understand the appeal of Texas and Colorado TV sets to the Pac Ten, but is it really in the realm of possibility that UT and CU would drop the Big 12 for the West Coast? Travel costs would be outrageous. Insiders constantly refer to this scenario.

2) 12 appears to be a magic number for teams in a conference. Couldn't the NCAA change the condition of 12 members for a Conference Title game? Also, the WAC discovered that 16 is too big a number of schools for a conference. Would 14 be more desireable, if someone feels the need to push the Super Conference idea and reduce the number of conferences in Div. 1?

3) If regional rationalization is a better idea, maybe 10 schools is better number?

4) When Miami, Syracuse and BC leave, the Big East has to raid Conference USA or exit FB. Can Conf. USA and Big East both survive in FB, whether or not either one gets tapped to be a BCS conference?

5) Louiville and Notre Dame are big winners in any alternative mentioned. Losers appear in no particular order to be Connecticut, Va Tech, Rutgers, WVA, Army and maybe Pittsburgh. Should Conference USA be the raiding party on the Big East? Pittburgh, WVA and VA Tech fit nicely into a Conference USA-East. Does that leave us at the mercy of whether Tulane and/or Houston stay Division 1 in order for Conf USA West to have room for us?

6) Is the SEC at as much risk with Arkansas as the Big 12 might be with Colo. and Texas?

Here is food for thought?

<A HREF="http://www.nwanews.com/adg/story_Sports.php?storyid=30976" TARGET=_blank>http://www.nwanews.com/adg/story_Sports.php?storyid=30976</A>

Texas legislature forbid UT from going to Pac 10 several years ago. Also A&M wanted to go to SEC at that time.

SEC would just add VT if Ark went to the Big 12.

Loss of Colorado and Mizzou would hurt but not kill the Big 12. After Ark another school would be found. Could be one of several. Depends on how each is doing at the time.

Forget Arkansas leaving the SEC while Broyles is AD. Just this past week he said for the umpteenth time that Arkansas is going nowhere. A) There's no one with a better financial deal, the reason re-alignment is going on in the first place; and B) Musical conferences just looks bad. Its one thing to leave what everyone knew was going to be a sinking ship (the SWC), its another thing to come off as a whore.
I can't speak for Texas, but CU has been playing Washington, USC, Oregon, and UCLA pretty regularly in OOC games over the years. The travel costs can't be THAT high.

1.) No its not. The financial penalties for anyone to try to leave the Big 12 are huge. Its not going to happen. Speculation like that comes from people who dont understand what they are talking about. Its lazy journalism.

2.) yes, the NCAA could change that number if they wanted, but so far there hasnt been any real move to do so.

3.) The question isnt specific enough. Too many variables affect the answer.

4.) Yes, both could survive, in some form. They're both actually stronger in basketball than football, particularly the 3 schools most rumored to be moving from C-USA to BE. They wouldnt be BCS level, but they could rip a few teams out of the MAC, and hold together for awhile. Eventually, though, finances would probably catch up with some of the teams in both leagues. Rutgers is rumored to have run a 13 million dollar deficit last year, while Tulane, Houston and UAB are all under the economic microscope as well. The MAC offers schools in Ohio and southeastern states that would be good geographic matches for either league, but they dont draw well and are run on shoestring budgets, they may not be able to stay in D1A in the years ahead.

5.) If C-USA holds together, they could raid eastward and bring in the best teams left from the Big East. In which case C-USA wouldnt have any interest in western schools. Even if Tulane and Houston dropped out, they might not replace them with western schools. Adding 3 teams from the Big East would give them 14 total, they could lose 2 and still not need to add anyone.

6.) Since the Big 12 is at absolutely no risk at all, I'd say that the threat level for the SEC is about the same.

1) While Colorado might be tempted, I just don't see Texas as a good fit in a new PAC-12. Obviously, adding the Denver, DFW, San Antonio and Houston media markets would be huge, but I'm not sure there would be enough addt'l revenue in it for texas to justify leaving a group that plays much closer to home. The travel demand on "student"-athletes will make their lives tougher.

2) I think the MAC has it right and 14 is a better number than 12. In these far flung conferences, that leaves 6 football games to be played in your region and 2 cross-over games, meaning only one long road trip each year in conference.

3) 10 schools doesn't work. With an 8 game conference slate, you always miss one conference mate. In the old SEC and today's Big 10 (11), that invariably results in the two best teams not playing each other.

4) CUSA and BE can both survive, but neither would be BCS caliber. See my post re: how CUSA can make an argument for BCS status as a 14 member league.

5) Again, if CUSA could raid the BE for Pitt, W Va, & Va Tech only, the big losers could be UConn, Rutgers, Temple & Army.

6) I do not see the SEC as vulnerable. I think they might be the strongest group of all.