Let's put it this way. Do you think by adding San Diego State or even Fresno that the Pac10 would 'significantly' increase the number of viewers in San Diego or Fresno? That they would increase the number of viewers by 1.9% which is the value given by the Pac10 commish considering they claim 19% of the TV sets?




I agree with you that 16 is too many. However, the BE only will get taken more seriously in FB if they win games regardless of whether the BB schools are there.

The Big east could stay together AND split if they move to a "federation" as per the original Gavitt proposal with football & non-football schools playing their schedules primarily within their own groups & with increased autonomy for each half.

It's far easier for me to believe that certain Big 12 schools will actually shuck what they see as dead weight by reconstituting the Southwest Conference... though many will find it odd that Nebraska, Kansas, Colorado, and Missouri somehow became southwestern teams.

Need I mention how the Big East will turn out?

Do SEC schools really want to continue associating with both Mississippi schools? Do they regret taking Arkansas when a Texas school might have been available? What value does South Carolina really have besides filling the football stadium every time? (I'm actually going from a pet hypothesis that the SEC needs Vanderbilt to make the academics actually look relevant)

Can you imagine the permutations with the ACC? (Might be too valuable a name to leave, however)

The odd twist on this is that the Big Ten is the conference most likely to stick with 12 if they go there. That's the conference, IMO, where the association is actually (well, perhaps barely) more valuable than the individual schools.

I disagree that 12 is the future. If you understand the Tom Hansen argument about the economics of expansion, you don't have to dig much further to determine the economics of contraction. If you believe that television will actually lose fans to the internet, without the internet ever really finding a truly profitable platform establishment, then you tend to wonder how the big TV contracts will maintain... and therefore I wonder what happens when the money doesn't flow as much as now. I think individual schools will act to protect their money to the extent that one or two new conferences will be formed and won't grow all that large.

bigd, nobody knows what will happen in 2010. Go back and read what was posted in 2003. Everyone was off. The Scenario for 2010 is endless. Maybe nothing big in 2010, maybe huge changes. My opinion we will see CUSA die or CUSA will end up with Southland and SBC schools.
I see the WAC looking different. At least 2 new conferences. Pac 10 going PAC 12. And a few minor changes in Big 12 and SEC. I also think Gonzaga will go WAC.

The BE got away from divisions because ADs or Presidents (IIRC) thought that one division was always stronger over the other and that would hurt the BE during tournament selection time.

The Big10 is much more than just an athletic conference. It's also an 'academic alliance' with the CIC.

When do the various TV contracts expire?

The lay of the land is always shifting & can shift quickly as events in 2003 demonstrated. The threat of losing a Rutgers or a Syracuse would be more than the conference could tolerate. Solidifying the football side of the conference would be a higher priority than basketball tournament selection issues.

The original Gavitt proposal was two semi-autonomous divisions which competer in a couple of inter-division challenge match-ups per team in December & a tournament involving all members in March. Otherwise home & home competition within division during the conference season in January & February.

BTW, I suspect that there are other issues besides relative strength of division & tournament selection. Some would include trips to desirable locations like NYC & high profile TV match-ups independent of division.

Then you're pulling these declarations out of untoward orifices. It's worth a laugh. Of course, I'm using logic and reason, and that's sometimes just as dangerous. My logic has better odds, however. ;)

(I also think Gonzaga will go WAC.)

No way Gonzaga will always be in the WCC, although the WCC may see some changes soon, suchas adding pacific, and seattle, and losing pepperdine. I just dont see anything huge by 2010. Maybe the big east split, c-usa losing 2, and the mwc adding some members. Rutgers may go to the big ten.

And my response to all of your delusions....WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!
REPEAT AFTER ME LOUISVILLE FAN OR MWC FAN: There is no guarantee that Big East will pick up Memphis. There Is NO Guarantee that the Big East will pick up Memphis.
Just because you hate C-USA a lot doesn't mean it's going to disappear. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
Also, the Pac 10 isn't going to expand. Period. Oregon, Washington, Oregon State, and Washington State lose out big time on Cali recruits if the Pac 10 expands at all. Therefore, no expansion.

If the Big East splits, it may be for the opposite reasons people have previously thought. The FB (all sports 1A) could embark on their own through strength, not weakness. In that case, they may have a option or two for future expansion that may have not existed previously.

The PAC 10 looks like it will not move for expansion unless "12" becomes comprehensive elsewhere throughout the BCS. A key to this may be a Big 10 addition. Another pressure point, would be a Big East split and fb expansion to 12. The Big East finding four others acceptable for 12 would be quite difficult or at least very unagreeable.

C-USA could become more southwestern oriented, more-so than it is now. While the conference has some good schools for its level and profile, their flanks are deeply spread-out, making them vulnerable to future expansion by any more lofty conference. However, only a Big East split and expansion would appear to offer any threat. If they unexpectedly do, C-USA, as it has before, will reload with Sun Belt types and/or LA Tech.

The MWC may be interested in UTEP and/or SMU if sustained competitiveness is re-established. Houston would be getting too far away from MWC country. Of course a raid on the prime WAC schools are always a factor. However note, many of the WAC and MWC schools have mutual state schools in common states, so such expansion has a political dimension that one conference does not destroy the other.

Arkansas is staying in the SEC, even if Mizzou ended up in the Big 10. I tend to believe the Big 12 is very stable, contrary to what some may think. Colorado is not going to the PAC 10 any time soon or ever, and Baylor is somewhat improving.

There is one school that could set much in motion: Notre Dame. They are riding high with renewed fb success, a continuing TV package on NBC, their sustained BCS inclusion, remaining a top favorite for bowls, and a Big East home for basketball. Unless things change negatively for Notre Dame football or all the big conferences shut them off (which will not happen), they are not embracing a conference for football.

Army and Navy appear to have found the means to satisfactorily operate independently via scheduling. The eastern services academies can do this due their national profiles, location, funding sources, and expectations.

Minor shifts may happen involving the Western Kentucky or Dakota types. Other than that, little is expected in terms of expansion for a couple or more years.

Of course big conferences remain unequal in size, dimension, and consistency. This remains unsettling to some, including myself. The merits of conference championship games will continue to be debated.

Excellent identification of the broader issue of where media overall is going. If the Big Ten Channel becomes successful, I believe that the other BCS conferences are going to take a whole lot more programming in-house (particularly the second and lower tier games) in order to take advantage of the new revenue streams that a cable network would provide. Rights to broadcasts through "new media" such as the Internet are also going to have a larger and larger effect as time goes on. Should a conference sell those rights off to an established entity such as ESPN.com or should they develop their own web platforms?

My prediction is that the most powerful of the BCS conferences (IMO, this list is the Big Ten, Big 12, SEC, and ACC) will establish a lot more in-house TV and web platforms because they have the financial power and widespread fan bases to do so. For the other conferences, it's going to be a lot tougher road to "go it alone", as the Mountain West is finding out with its failure to get its channel on in a number of its home markets.

While there's going to be a whole lot more content available across the board for all of the conferences big and small since the media universe is expanding daily, the largest conferences are going to have the ability the monetize that content in much more significant fashion, which will increase the gap between the haves and have-nots further.