http://www.dailycamera.com/bdc/sports_columnists/article/0,1713,BDC_2417_3745086,00.html






Unfortunately, I think that even if there were an exodus form the Big XII, the Big XII would simply bring in schools from the MWC to "fill in the blanks". The MWC could hold strong, but that might not be the case as we've seen with CUSA members when the Big East 4 came calling.


And if that were the case, it's doubtful that the Big XII would invite ALL of the MWC. There is no reason to bring along the likes of Wyoming.

It would be a nice looking group though...


BIG XII:
Missouri
Iowa St.
Kansas
Kansas st.
Nebraska
Colorado
*Colorado St
*Air Force
*Utah
*BYU

~add 4 from MWC...hold off for expansion to 12


WAC:

North>
Fresno St
San Jose St
Boise St
Nevada
*UNLV
Idaho

South>
*Wyoming
Utah St
*New Mexico
NMSU
*San Diego St.
Hawaii


New SWC:

Oklahoma
Oklahoma St
Texas
Texas A&M
Texas Tech
UTEP
Baylor
TCU
Arkansas



CUSA:

Tulsa
SMU
Rice
Houston
*LA Tech (replaces UTEP)
Tulane
Memphis****
USM
UAB
UCF
Marshall
ECU



SEC:
Tennessee
Georgia
Florida
South Carolina
Kentucky
* Memphis or West Virginia

Auburn
LSU
Alabama
Mississippi
Mississippi St
Vanderbilt




Big East:
UConn
Syracuse
Rutgers
Pitt
Louisville
Cincy
USF
****Memphis if WVU left for SEC


Sunbelt:
Remains the same

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.

I doubt a "southern secession" would occur, but it does make for good talk.

Would OK & TX really just ignore that TV $ Nebraska brings?

The writer missed a couple of items, in my point of view:

1. LA ST would obviously get the call from the new SWC, before they would even think of talking to TCU or SMU.

Even MO would probably have a better shot than SMU.

2. He also mentions, in passing, the old nugget that the Big 10 would more likely want MO over NE because of academics.

Given the league's ultimate desire for football TV money, NE would get a call right away to enter discussions. PA ST had to slightly increase standards for athletes to join, so who says NE wouldn't be willing to do the same thing?

The Big 10 believes that the CIC, their academic side, can quickly bring a school up to "Big 10 level," so they aren't going to shy away from a school that isn't there yet.

Would Arkansas actually accept the "SWC" invite at this point? Would they trade the SEC bonanza for Texas fans every other year, when those tickets are already sold?

Would LSU go?

I kind of doubt it. I'm more certain about LSU than Arkansas, but that's a lot of money to pass up.

Here's the real question: Would 5 of these southern 6 swallow their pride, invite Missouri (market size), Nebraska (football), and Kansas (basketball), and leave the rest in the dust? Would 4 trade in Oklahoma State in favor of Colorado? Something to ponder, anyway...

I used this scenerio on another board. You might move this to the "hypothetical" board, but I'm keeping with the theme. Assuming that the schools take the 12 team/championship formula:
SOUTHWESTERN Conference
WEST
New Mexico
Texas-El Paso
Texas Tech
Texas Christian
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
EAST
Texas
Texas A&M
Baylor
Houston
Arkansas
Tulane

BIG 12/ HEARTLAND Conference
WEST
Wyoming
Colorado State
Colorado
Air Force
Kansas
Kansas State
EAST
Nebraska
Iowa
Iowa State
Missouri
Missouri State*
Tulsa

Of course this is based on 4 big assumptions:
1. Arkansas would leave the SEC
2. Iowa would leave the Big 10
3. Four MWC schools would throw their conference to the wolves for a shot at a near guaranteed BCS bid (not far fetched)
4. Missouri State could move up (#2 in a BIG state shouldn't be that hard)

It would be interesting to see what Texas and Oklahoma would do to get a presence in Louisiana if LSU wouldn't go. In my scenerio it was Tulane. Is it possible that a high profile conference would ever take on a LA Tech or even a Louisiana-Lafayette and try to make them into a national "brand name"? Basically, is there any potential in that state outside of LSU?

This is a nice geographical alignment, however, it seems to ignore the cause of the friction that launched these rumors.

And that is that the 12-team conference with 2 divisions requires a conference championship game, where an undeserving weak sister from one division can come along and knock off a top-ranked (perhaps undefeated) powerhouse in the championship game, steal the BCS slot, and destroy the conference's shot of having a team claim the national title.

Interestingly, it's happened a few times in the Big XII, but ironically powerhouse teams from the NORTH have been upset on at least two occasions (Nebraska was upset by Texas the very first year of the 12-team alignment, and K State about 5 years ago, when they were ranked #3, lost to Texas A&M in several OTs, and ended up outside the BCS in the HQ/Builder's Square Bowl in San Antonio). OU must still be smarting from their loss to K State two season's ago.... (although K State was a very good team, that dropped in the rankings when they lost a few games while decimated by injuries.).

So what led to these [probably ridiculous] rumors of a break-up is that the divisional play with a championship game is not a panacea. It does generate more revenue, but it is poses a huge risk to a powerhouse team (who may face a motivated team that the powerhouse defeated in the regular season (opposite division teams in the Big XII play each other on the average of every other year)).

If every conference was 12 with a championship game, it would be fair. With the PAC10, BE, B10(11) playing a round-robin (that doesn't even include everybody else for the PAC10 and Big-10 or Big10(11)), there are fewer late-season hurdles to finish #1. Perhaps the elite teams are looking at USC's recent success and re-thinking the concept of 12 team conferences with divisions.

In the "BCS" era, Tennessee (1998) and Oklahoma (2000) are the only teams from a "superconference" to finish undefeated and claim a national title...

If memory serves, Kansas State was #1 in both polls (or at least in the BCS) at the time it lost to Texas A&M...even after that loss, Kansas State was still #3 in the BCS, played (and lost) in the Alamo Bowl to a 7-5 Purdue team, and the "3/4" rule (aka "K-State" rule) was created...

Mr. Ouija -

I believe you are correct. KSU was #3 AFTER the loss to A&M (I think they were up by two TDs late in that one), and they lost the Alamo Bowl to Purdue after blowing a lead late in that game as well.

In addition to Tennessee and OU "running the table" in their super-conferences (SEC, BigXII), Auburn this past year survived the full SEC gauntlet and finished undefeated and won their bowl game......
and never got a shot at the national championship. That's pretty brutal..... and the best argument yet for a playoff.

And while a stretch, I guess there could be some interest by Colorado in the PAC 10 but it would have to be a two-way choice. Perhaps Colorado and Utah to the PAC-10.

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.

Interesting Quinn, et. al.,

How it could impact the SEC:
If Arkansas (no serious indication they would), left for a revised Big12 or new SW-type conference, I would tend to think West Virginia would be a serious consideration for the SEC to consider as a replacement. It would strengthen the SEC's nothern sector (Kentucky) and position itself well intersecting ACC, BE, and even Big10 turf. West Virginia is a flagship school and their enthusiasm for football, and their strengthened bb, would blend OKay into the SEC. The ACC and Big10 have never sought West Virginia, be it its hilly, rural region location and its moderate image, academically. It does draw a whole state southward noting its Morgantown location; and there is appreciable fan and media interest from the Pittsburgh area. While West Virgina is largely a rural state, it is located to be contiguous with more than one conference.
Memphis has had some recent success and growth. It is very close to Ole Miss and borders the State of Arkansas. Location wise, it would fit in with the SEC west as a ready replacement. On the west side though, the SEC would be withdrawing to its old pre-expansion boarders, so to speak; and, would mean three teams from the State of Tennessee. Also, Memphis has that city name; and the SEC would also be receptive to a prime Texas school for the west. They certainly would love Texas A&M even without UT.
It is doubtful any changes though, will be coming in the SEC. That appears one of the more stable and solid conferences in terms of members. They have no incentive to introduce a 14 membership thing, and the enticements for Arkansas to leave, even if there is a Big12 re-arrangement. Arkansas was the first to leave the Old SW that eventually led to its breakup. A renewed SW may be more appealing with the Oklahoma schools in the mix, but may fall short of luring Arkansas. If LSU was willing to go to, then decision for Arkansas to move would be much easier. However, LSU's ties and rivalries in the SEC are as near as strong as any other SEC member.

For sake of disclosure, I am an OU fan, living in Texas.

First, the conference championship game issue: Yes, the Big XII has had multiple teams lose chances to go to the national championship game. This scenario, among others, causes coaches to be against it, naturally.

The ADs and presidents see it as a necessary evil, due to the money involved. The idea of eliminating divisions was floated by OU and Texas, in my opinion, for two reasons: 1) by Joe Castiglione (AD at OU) with the idea that "if we have to have a championship game, let's give our best regular season team as great a chance as possible to win it..". 2) by Deloss Dodds (AD at Texas) to give Texas a greater chance to get to the championship game, especially since they are in the same division with OU and a resurging A&M. There is a great chance that OU, Texas, and A&M may be the best three programs in the conference in the upcoming years. Conversely, there is the chance that Nebraska and Kansas State may return to a higher level of play. This proposal is DOA, as the 6 North schools will vote against it.

Divisions have already been eliminated in basketball, but the schools still play each team in their own "division" twice, and the other schools once. The basketball coaches have discussed moving to a similar model as the Big East, by which higher profile teams play each other more often, regardless of geography (ex: Kansas would play Texas twice). This would improve the strength of schedule/RPI for higher-level programs, while giving lower-level programs more chances for wins.

As for Big 12 breakup rumors: in my opinion, they are pure bunk. Arkansas will not leave the SEC as long as Frank Broyles is still around. He will not want to be in a conference with the Texas schools, though they do want to play here in order to recruit. Once Broyles is no longer there, all bets are off, but I still don't see them leaving the SEC for the Big 12 or a new, improved SWC. They now have 12+ years of history and relationships in the SEC, which will only grow longer and stronger. The school is located closer to 5 present Big XII schools, and was in the SWC with 4 others. However, it is a Southern state, and fits culturally with the SEC. For what it is worth, Arkansas was always rumored to be leaving the SWC for the Big 8, but never did.

The Big 12 is a stronger conference than it was 10 years ago, when it was formed as a marriage of convenience and survival. The only schools I can see leaving would be Missouri (whom I give only about a 10% chance) to be the 12th Big 10 school, or Colorado (10-20% chance) to go to the Pac 10, as the only truly logical academic/athletic partner for Utah (BYU's LDS church ties fly in the face of the Pac 10, culturally....and I don't believe the Pac 10 wants any more schools unless they absolutely have to). The rest of the schools will stay as much as a matter of need than as of want. Texas had their chance to go to the Pac 10 in the 90's, but were reined in by the Texas Legislature. Same with A&M and the SEC.

Keeping Air Force, Colorado, Colorado St., and Wyoming together is a nice idea.

There are probably 3-4 million people along that 3 hour stretch of I25.

Certainly not for football, but with their recent basketball success, I wouldn't count out Nevada/Utah.

Hypothetical idea I dreamt up in my sleep last night:

SOUTHWEST(Expanded Big 12 South): Arkansas, Baylor, Louisiana State, Memphis, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech

HEARTLAND WEST(Bits of Big 12 North and MWC): Air Force, Brigham Young, Colorado, Colorado State, Kansas, Kansas State, Nebraska, Utah, Wyoming

MISSISSIPPI VALLEY 9(Western Big Ten with additions): Illinois, Iowa, Iowa State, Minnesota, Missouri, Missouri State, Northern Illinois, Northwestern, Wisconsin

(New)BIG TEN: Cincinnati, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisville, Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Purdue, Toledo

BIG EAST: Army, Boston College, Connecticut, Marshall, Maryland, Navy, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse, Temple, West Virginia

ATLANTIC COAST: Clemson, Duke, East Carolina, North Carolina, NC STATE, South Carolina, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest

SEC: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Miami(FL), Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Tulane, Vanderbilt

SUN BELT: UAB, Arkansas State, Central Florida, Florida Atlantic, Florida International, Louisiana Tech, Middle Tennessee, South Florida, Southern Mississippi, Troy

GULF STATES(New): Houston, UL-Lafayette, UL-Monroe, New Mexico State, North Texas, Rice, Southern Methodist, UTEP, Texas Christian, Tulsa

WESTERN ATHLETIC(Absorbs MWC reminats): Boise State, Fresno State, Hawaii, Idaho, Nevada, UNLV, San Diego State, San Jose, State, Utah State

PACIFIC-10: the same as now.

_________________
Do you ahhhhh......realign?

That's the 2nd post in this thread alone trying to pair Missouri State with Missouri.

Southwest Missouri State won't even be known as Missouri State until next year.

Demographically, they don't have much support. They're 3 hours on I44 from both Tulsa OK and Saint Louis MO.

Yes, MO is a big state, but all it's population is either in Saint Louis or Kansas City (with Mo. right between them and Kan., Kan. St., and Iowa St. not too far frpm Kansas City).

Springfield does have a decent population, 325k. But that's it for 3 hours in any direction.


Then look at their facilities. Their bball arena is not too bad (but old and needed some upgrading) and I do remember their women's bball team making a run not too long ago.

But their football simply isn't there. Their stadium is very DIaa style with max cap. of 16k (and I doubt they get that except for SEMO and maybe a couple others).


I just don't get it.

Look where Washington State is and tell me they still can't draw alot from the state pop (which is mostly clear over in the Seattle area).

Missouri is more than big enough to support two large I-A programs. Though it might do so at the expense of Kansas, which draws from KC.