Dennis Dodd blog article discussing current Big12 realignment situation at http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootbal ... ealignment

DING DING

They need 6 to leave before the GOR expires so Texas, Tech, OU, OSU need to find a landing spot for two of the rest assuming that is the goal. PAC12 may just grab those 4 along with Kansas and K State and go to PAC18 if they really REALLY want Texas and think they can work with the LHN or convince them to drop it. Add even if they don't want KU/KSU I'm sure they could convince the ACC to take WVU and the B1G/SEC to possibly take Kansas.

Assuming that Texas wants to keep the LHN and the PAC12 doesn't, the ACC is still fair game as soon as they figure out what the exit fee really is. The Big 12 could further secure itsself amoung the Big 4 by basically working along side (not with) the Big 10 and SEC to divide up the most attractive pieces of the pie.

SEC- VA Tech/NCSU
B1G- UVA/UNC
B12- FSU/Clemson/GA Tech/Miami/Duke/Pitt/Lville/Syracuse (plus WVU to make it an even 9/9 East/West split)
ACC- Wake Forest/Boston College/and ND non football sports

At that point we'd have the Big 12 at 18, SEC & B1G at 16, and PAC12 at 12 with the MWC and new ACC 2.0 as the top midmajors (and if the ACC keeps the Orange bowl deal after that many defections then the MWC+BSU/SDSU/BYU should really push for a similar Fiesta Bowl type deal with the Big12/PAC12).

The Big 12 would still be the weakest of the Big 4 and still be poachable after the GOR, but it would give them instant crediblity and stability. If I'm the ACC and the 4 VA/NCs above leave for the SEC/B1G dumping BC and Wake to join Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas sounds like a great plan.

_________________
Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...

Eh...I think they let the Cardinals go to the conference they most wanted to be in. It's a smart move.

These guys know who they want and won't expand unless they get only them. Zero compromise.

Yeah. I think the B12 wanted UL with WVU now in, but they didn't love the #12 options. I think the B12 dropped the ball by not adding Rutgers and Louisville with WVU to grab a STRONG share of the northeast. Granted as we've seen with Maryland, exit fees might not have stopped Rutgers from the B10 even if they were in the B12...although the tV rights waiver would be more than $50 million.

I think now we'll see how the exit fee situation plays out with Maryland in the ACC. There are benefits of FSU and GA Tech in the B12 with the likes of WVU, Texas, Oklahoma, OSU, etc. That's the B12 bug play (add 2 ACC schools from the pool of 3). But at $50 million...can they do it? Not sure.

_________________


@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.

Chip Brown blog article discussing FSU and possible future Big 12 expansion at http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID ... &PT=4&PR=2

I'm trying to get my mind around this one...to me, what makes FSU any more or less gullible than Missouri? There is a security gamble here that just doesn't make sense...the Big XII isn't as secure as the ACC is, and that "bloc of four" is as good as gone to the PAC the moment the LHN issue can be resolved. Where that leaves FSU thereafter is essentially at the mercy of one conference it would have turned its back on (ACC) and one that has historically blocked them (SEC). So, for a few years, FSU gets some cash, has its conference vanish from beneath them, and then come back hat-in-hand to its other options and think everything would be fine?

I'm all-in on getting FSU out of this spotlight, because they're getting to be a real pain in these matters. Like, TAMU-level pain. Tow the line or shut the trap, you know?

The other message in this piece, is that Bowlsby/B12 still have hopes to land Notre Dame olympic sports. Good grief! Notre Dame could have held the BE together with something for fb years ago, but refused.
The ACC went mini-hybrid to get Notre Dame olympic sports w/ 5 promised fb games per year. They also took ND's old BE standbys'. The B1G reacted and extracted Maryland from the ACC, and further disrupted the ACC's planned east coast dynasty by taking Rutgers also.
This fawning over Notre Dame olympic sports has a record of spelling trouble and demise. Notre Dame shall take one's money, their bowls, their 5 star recruits, their publicity, extract what's needed for their schedules, and wipe the dog doodoo off their feet on the host conference's expectations for fb.

Agreed. I'm not convinced the 5-game commitment will happen at all, especially if Notre Dame has say on when and where they will play these games. I still look at that last week of the season when GT, FSU, and Clemson have their rivalry games and see it as a huge obstacle for the ACC and an amazing opportunity for the Irish to exploit, among other "cracks." Like, what happens in years when ND travels for Navy, 'SC, Stanford, MSU, Purdue, etc.?

But if the Big XII thinks they could have done any better, they are totally full of it. The Irish go to Morgantown, Ft. Worth, Ames, and Waco? Yeah...riiiiiight.

I also had a hard time envisioning Notre Dame to a Texas-based conference.

Not sure what to make of Orangeblood...

Does Chip Brown parrot the idle musings of the Texas AD about a dream world dominated by all things Texas,
or are any of these thoughts coming from Chip Brown ?
Clearly there is a bias in his thinking that the Big XII is the be-all and end all for college football.

So what is really going on with "Sugar" Bowlsby and the Big XII powers-that-be ?

a) Are they content to sit tight and frolic in their new-found weealth ? (nothing wrong with that...)
b) Are they anticpating a day when something tries to forcec the 5 big conferneces into 4 (if so, the Big XII or ACC seem most likely to be "absorbed").
c) If the long-range plan was to ever expand without raiding another Big 5 conference, they seemed to "miss the boat", by not going after Louisville before the ACC swooped in.
In terms of quality and location, Louisville would have fit nicely into the Big XII. Agree that #12 would be problematic - Cincy is OK, but doesn't WOW anyone.
But grabbing Louisville would have forced ACC to take UConn, and protected some Big XII expansion "turf".
Surprised that there were not at least a few rumblings out of the Big XII regarding Louisville.....

A thoguht... might we see the ACC replace their $50 million exit fee with a Granting of TV Rights ?
If that is a better "obstacle" to leaving, in that it's sort of discrete - a departing school can't really "negotiate it down".

The problem the B12 faces is the same one they're always going to face and why the league will eventually be decimated.

They lack significant TV sets compared to the others. Adding Florida State, Clemson, Va Tech and Louisville for 14 and going:
West: Texas, Tech, OU, OSU, KU, KSU, ISU
East: Baylor, TCU, WVU, Louis, Clem, Va Tech, FSU

Gets them a lot more TV sets and makes them stronger.
But it also makes the Big Ten and SEC stronger, because if the ACC is gonna get raided, the Big Ten will jump on Ga Tech and UNC, maybe some others; and the SEC will turn around and -- if they want too -- trump the Big XII for Va Tech.

They'll add more TV sets, but fall further behind the SEC and Big Ten.

And of course, this will pretty much destroy the semblance of traditional rivalries for all but about 15 schools in major college football (those who change conferences, and those who's schedules are adjusted by larger conferences), which opens the door for "screw this, let's just make one large TV Network conference to rival the Big Ten"

_________________
1897-1898 | 1900-06 | 1926-27 | 1929-30 | 1939 | 1942

Is there really any more validity to the Texas to Pac option?

When I was following Kirk Bohls on Twitter and saw a pattern of Texas trying to wish Oklahoma on the Pac and then "look east," and then various events transpired, I kind of started to think that there was eventually going to be either a dismantling of the XII or the ACC. There could still be a shotgun marriage of the two, perhaps.

Furthermore, while I wonder if the Pac's play wouldn't involve the "other two" iconic institutions in the XII...

...Oklahoma football and Kansas basketball...

...it feels like there's a "meh" out here. It seems more likely that Larry Scott did part of the bridge work and realized someone wasn't crossing it, and now there's a sudden lack of aggression.

You're right... specifically Colorado and Utah wanted no part of the expansion to 16.

When PAC was thinking about adding UT ,TT, OU, OSU, Scott needed 9 of 12 votes and 2 emphatic NOs were Colorado and Utah.

Those 2 schools enjoy being in a divison with SoCal (which they are in the PAC-12 South).

However, if the 4 Texas & Oklahoma schools came aboard, they PAC 16 was going to split into the old PAC-8 (Wash, Oregon, Cali)
and an eastern division of AU. ASU, Utah, CU, OU, OSU, TT, UT.
Colorado and Utah, would lose their recruiting in California, and be the little guys in this new division, so they urged Scott to kill it.

I think we're all looking at the Big 12 now, since they were able to save themselves from collapse, and look at the ACC movement, and right now, we're all looking to see if schools like FSU, Clemson, GA Tech and NC State would make the move make the Big 12 the Big 14.

And if the Big Ten were to take (2) ACC schools like Virginia and UNC, then sure, those schools could be in play even more.

But once the Big 12 grants waiver is up, it will still come down to money. And if the Big 12 schools of Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and OSU see more money in joining the Pac-12, then sure, it could happen. There are issues at stake beyond the timeline of waiting out the grants waiver, like the LHN, academics, etc.

But it comes down to one point: anything can still happen at this point in the Big 12. They could get stronger with ACC additions, they could add Big East schools, they could remain at 10, they could add MWC schools, and in the future, they could still lose schools to conferences like the Pac-12, Big Ten or SEC.

_________________


@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 honestly don't think the Big XII raiding the ACC is a good move for the power-brokers of the Big XII.

Down the road, do Texas and Oklahoma want to be with Iowa State, Kansas State, Baylor, Tech and TCU... and four ACC members? Wouldn't they rather be with each other and 8-12 ACC members?

They should revive the Southwest Conference with Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Florida State, Clemson, Va Tech, Georgia Tech, UNC and Duke.

_________________
1897-1898 | 1900-06 | 1926-27 | 1929-30 | 1939 | 1942

I hear ya. Problem is, as the ACC expands and even loses members...like Maryland...they add Big east members. So there is no space in the ACC.

I mean, if say the Big Ten took (2) ACC schools like Virginia and UNC, would Texas/Texas Tech/Oklahoma/OSU leave the Big 12 to become a 16 school conference with BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, VA Tech, Miami, Duke, WFU, NC State, Clemson, GA Tech and FSU?

_________________


@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.