To get to the Big East. Seriously. They have had that dream since the late 1990s.

In my opinion, if the Big East loses Rutgers and Syracuse to the Big Ten, then the remaining six would be better off trying to team up with other existing leagues than just plugging and replacing. Memphis, UCF, ECU, and any other usual suspects are no replacement for schools with such a presence in New York. Some say "the Memphis market" would be an asset. No it wouldn't; metro Memphis is NOT that big. As for football quality, they're nowhere near the level that, for example, Louisville was when it joined the league. They're barely even among the top ten best NON-BCS programs; I'd rank TCU, BYU, Utah, Boise, Houston, Central Michigan, and Nevada ahead of all of them.

If the ACC were at all willing to expand once again, they'd take UConn & Pitt, but not anyone else. I'm 100% certain about that. The ACC takes pride in its standards for academics. All ACC schools are Tier 1. Among the six and none of the others would make the cut. (They would also add very minimal TV market value compared to what it already has.)

If the ACC doesn't call for anyone, then the remaining six should, individually, lobby for the Big 12 to take them in. I happen to think it could work. Such an expansion could immediately give the Big 12 a presence in new, surprising places like Pittsburgh, New England, SE Ohio/Kentucky, and/or Florida. Besides, if the Big 12 loses one or more teams to the Pac-10 or Big Ten, it would need replacements, and who better than teams who are ALREADY at the BCS level?

Whoever doesn't get accepted into the Big 12 would have few alternatives than to build an alliance with the Mountain West. (This idea's been tossed around on this site before.)

Think that's crazy? Well consider this: If you're the president of the University of West Virginia, and you've just lost one of your most valued programs in Syracuse, despite its struggles over the past decade, AND you've lost a program that can capture the New York market in Rutgers, at least when they're winning, would you rather be doing business in a league with established programs like Oklahoma, Texas A&M;, Kansas, K-State, and hopefully Texas, or would you rather stay in a league in which four of the schools have been at the BCS level only since 2005 (L'ville, Cincy, USF, & UConn), only to add two more unproven programs? I'd try to go the Big 12.

And the Big 12, if it loses, say Colorado and Nebraska, would be smart to add BYU, but no one else near them would add as much value as a Big East team. TCU would add next to nothing–not in terms of football quality– because virtually no new viewers would tune into the Big 12 in Texas than it already gets.

WKU might make more sense. The Sun Belt seems to me the rock-bottom conference in the FBS. The MAC, by contrast, seems to have much more stability and cohesiveness between its members. Most schools are around the same size, and all are public. The Sun Belt has huge schools like FIU and FAU, mid-size like MTSU, and small ones like Denver. I could see why WKU would accept an offer from the MAC.

That leads me to a question perhaps someone could help me with: Why did Marshall leave MAC? Marshall was extremely successful in the MAC but has mostly struggled since leaving. Its rivalries were much closer, while ECU, the closest C-USA opponent, is about as far as its farthest MAC opponent.

And I don't think there is any scenario in my lifetime where a MAC school would be a Big East candidate…not when virtually all the CUSA schools are better options from a market and success standpoint.