Wednesday, March 17, 2010

NCAA Conference Realignment

Given the recent spate of coverage across the intertubes regarding the potential for Big 10 expansion and Big 12 dissolution, I offer my remedy:
1. Big 10 takes Mizzou or Pitt to form the Big 12 2.0.
2. If #1 = Pitt, then Big East takes Mizzou or Nebraska (best either can do).
3. Pac 10 scans the carnage and smiles.
4. Texas + TAMU + OU + CU + BYU + filler school to be named later to the new Pac 16. I'm thinking Mizzou is a possibility if still available.
5. KU, KSU, OkSU, TT, and whoever's left of Mizzou/Nebraska plus TCU, Utah, and Wyoming form new Midmajor 8. If Mizzou and Nebraska already out of play consider Houston, with Baylor then joining CUSA.
6. WAC absorbs reamining 5 MWC schools to form 16 team conf.
7. In 10 years Midmajor 8 and Big East merge forming mega basketball conference that dominates the NCAA tournament for decades.

Also, the "Texas to independent" movement may get legs if Texas can come up with a distribution model that pulls in big internet bucks, since it won't be able to get a sweetheart TV deal.

7 comments:

Ojo Rojo said...

Does this really have any steam? The one thing that I've heard is that the Big 10 (11) is looking to add a school and that will set off this chain reaction. Anything that results in the Big 10 and Pac 10 having a conference championship game, I'm for.

llogg said...

Well, if the Big 10 sits still then nothing is likely to change, but the Big 10 is likely to make a move from everything I've read. Everybody from the West Virginia coach to the Pac 10 commish seem to think super-conferences are an inevitability. My scheme seems like it sucks now, but it all made sense when I came up with it at 3 am one day. Mizzou and Nebraska ain't leaving the Big 12 for the Big Fuckin East. They only do that if the Big 12 dissolves first.

Snake Diggity said...

Notre Dame, Iowa ST., Mizzou to Big 10. Brings ND national fanbase to Big 10, allows ND to stem slide by being competitive in overrated Big 10. Time is right since Michigan is down.

BYU, Boise, to PAC 10. Increases quality in PAC 10 to keep legitimacy since they can't just stand pat with all the other movement. I could also see Colorado going Pac-10.

Arkansas, TCU to Big 12. TCU adds both quality and further monopolizes the Dallas TV market. Arkie is able to be more competitive and brings more southeast market. Wouldn't be surprised to see UH in the mix.

I don't see any way UT leaves Tech, A&M, or even OU behind. A north made up of Nebraska, Arkie, KSU, KU, OU, and OSU and a south of Texas, A&M, TCU, Tech, UH, and Baylor is pretty stout.

Ojo Rojo said...

I just wonder how much Texas, OU and A&M (or any of the other Big XII schools) are going to want to invite schools from Houston and Dallas into the bigtime. They enjoy a huge recruiting advantage as long as the local metro schools are part of shitty conferences.

llogg said...

TCU is not set up for long term success. They don't sell out their 40k stadium. They aren't that attractive to TV because they don't even carry the DFW market.

OU and Texas would love for the status quo to remain, but if expansion gives the other conferences even more leverage with TV networks then they'll be forced to make a move. Trying to tie Texas athletics to Tech and TAMU is retarded. That doesn't mean it won't be the case, though. Still, the Pac10 would have no use for ATM and less for Tech.
If the Big10 goes to 14 I'd hate to see Iowa State included. They'ra a shitty school with a shitty program that will never compete or contribute TV sets. If they got to 14 teams and the Pac10 doesn't go to 16 then Texas might be one of the three new Big10 teams.

llogg said...

Alternative possibility to realignment into super conferences is conference coalitions in which each conference maintains an independent identity but contracts with others for leverage in TV negotiations. So if the Big 10 expands with Notre Dame, the Big12 and Pac10 might partner up to squeeze out a better TV deal. Something like a set percentage of non-conference games must be with the other conference. You'd get a better product for the consumer (fewer Eastern Mississippi A&M at Horn Lake vs. TEXAS type games) and better leverage with the networks. Revenue sharing would be the big sticking point here as Texas would want to continue the unequal (but equitable) revenue sharing they've got going now while all the Pac10 commies would want to go pinko-style.

Jacob said...

The reason I linked TT and A&M w/ UT in my scenario is that everything I've heard is that the 3 are tied together because TT and ATM (and UH for that matter) are "UT System" schools, which somehow links their fates. Haven't quite figured out why yet.

The best case scenario for Texas would be to have an all in-state conference with a prominent alliance with another conference which carries a large media market (most obviously the PAC-10). It would maintain Texas' recruiting edge, since UH, TT, ATM, etc. will most likely never match the Horns in budget or prestige. It would be a relatively (probably "BCS Quality") competitive conference. It would eliminate schools (OU, Nebraska, KU, etc.) which infiltrate impinge on Texas' in-state recruiting from time to time (these schools also leech $ from the Big 12 without adding a major TV market). FInally, an alliance with the Pac-10 would ensure bargaining power with the TV people and bring major TV markets (mainly L.A.) into the mix.