The Pac-10 Might Soon Be the Pac-16. Is the Big Ten Next?
Unless you've been hiding under a rock for the past six hours, you probably know the basics, but, here goes:
A report from www.orangebloods.com Thursday had Texas, Texas Tech, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Colorado bolting for a new-look Pac-10 Conference. Missouri and Nebraska are rumored as Big Ten expansion candidates. That could leave Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State and Baylor looking for new conferences.
Pac-10 officials open their spring meetings Friday in San Francisco, where future plans could be announced.
Of course, we've seen roughly six million rumors regarding Big Ten expansion during the past few months, and none of them actually had a shred of accuracy. So, I was prepared to file this under the normal "don't believe anything unless it's from a conference president's mouth" category, but as Orson said at the time, the rumor was "a) weirdly specific, and b) [written by] Chip Brown, who is not generally given to foolishness." Those words seem awfully prescient now; a conference president AND an affected athletic director are now on the record. Larry Scott, Pac-10 commissioner:
"While many interesting scenarios have been suggested in numerous news reports, around the country, we remain focused on a thorough evaluation process that examines all of the options for increasing the value of the Conference for our member institutions, our student athletes and our fans. We have not developed any definitive plans. We have not extended any invitations for expansion and we do not anticipate any such decisions in the near term."
Note the very conspicuous lack of a denial there. (Contrast Scott's reaction with Jim Delaney's outright rumor dismissals. The difference is unmistakable, and plausibly not an accident.) And then, the bigger news:
Colorado athletic director Mike Bohn said he and other school officials have been led to believe the Pac-10 Conference is on the verge of issuing invitations to six members of the Big 12 to join its ranks.
Bohn said CU has not had any contact with the Pac-10 or its representatives and he was not clear on how he came to believe invitations could be forthcoming. But he said Colorado, Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech could receive invitations possibly as soon as this weekend when Pac-10 officials meet in San Francisco.
"The longer that we were together in Kansas City it appeared that that rumor or speculation did have some validity to it," Bohn said in an interview with the Camera as he left the Big 12 spring meetings here today.
Clearly, this is the most concrete, well-founded rumor we've heard so far. Colorado has long been pegged as the most likely Pac-10 expansion candidate, it's been widely assumed that Texas and Texas A&M are a package deal (and those who really study the matter think that Texas Tech has to come along for the ride, too), and Oklahoma and Oklahoma State--who may also be a package deal--certainly would make fine additions as well. Under this plan, the new Pac-10 would be able to divide neatly into two divisions (the original Pac-8 coastal schools in one division, and the six new schools along with Arizona and Arizona State in the "inland" division), and would be an athletic colossus, particularly in football.
If it's true, it's a masterstroke from a conference than many assumed a) would ultimately be forced to refrain from the expansion game altogether because of Stanford's insistence on maintaining high academic standards, and b) would be a reactionary player, not the catalyst. This expansion would obviously put them in the vanguard of expansion, and would create a conference to rival any other financially, with a presence in 7 of the 20 biggest U.S. television markets. Crazy.
What it might mean for the Big Ten, after the jump.
It seems that in the past month or so, the conventional wisdom has shifted a bit on probable new Big Ten members. Missouri and Nebraska are widely assumed to be at or near the top of the list, and if the GodzillaPac-10 comes to fruition, they'd be left with virtually no other viable options. If it seemed like Mizzou, in particular, was throwing itself at the Big Ten like a drunken floozy at last call prior to today, well, we ain't seen nothin' yet. It's possible to construct a scenario wherein the remaining Big 12 teams (Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State, Nebraska, Mizzou, Iowa State) poach a few Mountain West and/or Conference USA members and make a run of it, but the damage their collective competitiveness, prestige, and each school's bottom line, would be enormous. At this point, it's Big Ten or bust for Mizzou and Nebraska. The Big Ten, of course won't have any interest in Kansas State, Iowa State, or Baylor.
Which leaves Kansas--to me, the most interesting player (or non-player) in the maelstrom. I've long believed that KU would be a great addition for the Big Ten, and in many ways superior to Mizzou. Kansas obviously wouldn't bring a ton to the table football-wise, but they'd be an absolutely epic basketball addition. Going to Allen Fieldhouse and having KU at the Breslin Center on a regular basis would be faaaaaaaantastic. And if this is all true, KU will do absolutely everything possible to get a bid to the Big Ten. Basketball's king there, and any conference that they could end up in would be a massive downgrade from the current Big XII -- except for our conference, of course. KU's basketball fortunes could sink dramatically if they're left out in the cold, and one would have to believe that they'd go to great lengths to avoid that from happening.
However, it's not like Jim Delany is going to expand the conference for charitable reasons. Most have assumed that any new member to the Big Ten would have to be treated as a full member, with full economic rights and benefits from the get-go. If that's the case, there's no incentive to add KU (or Nebraska or Mizzou, for that matter) because they'd be willing to share revenues unequally, at least initially. Presumably, as a prerequisite to extending a conference invitation, the Big Ten will have to determine that the new member will 1) bring a net economic benefit to the conference (i.e., make it worthwhile to dilute each existing school's piece of the revenue pie), 2) be acceptable academically, and 3) be competitive athletically. While KU, NU, and MU would be orphaned by these events, it's not the Big Ten's responsibility to play Daddy Warbucks.
Regarding the Big Ten's next moves, two observations:
- The new Big Ten will almost certainly be a 16-team league, if only because we'd need to do so in order to remain competitive in this brave new world. My (admittedly pollyanna-ish) hope that we'd be able to add Notre Dame and be done with it seems positively quaint now.
- And, speaking of Notre Dame, it seems to me that this move would reduce the chances of the Irish joining the conference. Notre Dame's AD famously said that a "radical change in the industry" might force ND to join a conference. While this is clearly a radical change, it seems less likely that this is the right kind of radical change. With Nebraska, Kansas, and Missouri suddenly on the market, it seems more likely that the Big Ten might be looking west -- thereby reducing the chance of a Big East collapse.
The Pac-10 meetings open tomorrow, and if anything could relegate the NCAA's imminent decision on USC's future to the back burner, it's this. If true, it's an utter bombshell. Throughout this entire process, Jim Delany has seemed to be in total control; that status is obviously in question now, as the dominoes may have already started to fall. The next few days and weeks should be very interesting.
16 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I think the Big East collapses (on the football side) no matter how the expansion shakes out. A few of their big football programs will be poached and they will be left without BCS money. I can see the Big East surviving with the basketball-centric schools, something that should’ve been done awhile ago.
Who gets taken if we look west?
On the assumption that this happens, the top half of the remaining Big XII schools are no less attractive (arguably more) than any Big East schools and they’d be available without wreaking havoc elsewhere.
I'll believe it when I see it
It’s at least as plausible as any of the Big Ten rumors that have been thrown around, but I don’t see that it’s substantially more so.
To me, the Colorado AD's statement made all the difference.
I debated internally for a while before writing this, and I’m fully prepared to look like a fool if it turns out to be nothing. But I think there’s more to this one than the others.
PP-TPW.
The Only Colors
If one conference goes supernova, I expect the rest to do so as well
because they need to be able to market themselves for TV contracts
Pac-10 becomes Pac-16 +6
Big XII loses 6 to Pac-10, 2 to Big Ten -8
SEC +4
ACC +4
Big Ten becomes Big 16 +5
Big East loses 3 to Big Ten, possibly the rest to the ACC and SEC (the SEC might consider taking the orphaned KU or KSU and both might raid the sun belt)
Light a man a fire, he'll stay warm for a day.
Light a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Big 12 orphans
Nebraska, Kansas State, and Iowa State better start kissing some serious backside. They are going to be sitting at the kids’ table very, very soon.
'Brasky
Agree fully on the other two, but Nebraska is one of the crown jewels of the Big XII. If that conference comes apart suitors will line up for Nebraska’s services. Their football program is worth a mint.
dude...
Nebraska has been awful at football lately. They no longer command prestige in anyway. Same as UM except they didn’t quite implode as much.
I want KU because they have been decent in football and kick Basketball ass. And Syracuse cuz they also can be decent in football.
Texas apparently is still a possibility if anyone heard the rumour that the OSU AD threw out today. I think that Texas is going to be having the Big Ten and Pac Ten begging them, but I could see them going Big Ten cuz of the Network.
My dream additions are: Notre Dame and or Missouri (I honestly dont care either way), Kansas, Texas, Syracuse, Pittsburgh. But Nebraska? They can go screw themselves I don’t want anything to do with them.
Ooonst ooonst muthafucka!
Ugh
The more this stuff gets discussed, the more I hate it. A 16-team conference is not a damn conference. The PAC 10 is actaully the league I admire most, because they play a round robin in football. Conference championships in a 16-team conference are going to approach mythical national championship levels of arbitrary.
It’s not broke, but everyone seems to want to fix it.
Then you're really not going to like this
“There is an enormous amount of speculation about conference expansion right now and I think with the Pac-10 that anything is possible, all the way from remaining with the status quo, where we are today, to a full merger with the Big 12 and anything in between,‘’ [Washington AD Scott] Woodward said Thursday afternoon. "All possibilities are viable and open for discussion.’’
Fight for The Only Colors: Green and White!
by KJ@theonlycolors on Jun 4, 2010 1:26 PM CDT up reply actions
A full merger with the Big XII? There is no way that happens. A 16-team conference is probably too big. A 22-team conference would be a nightmare to be in.
by SpartanBoiler on Jun 4, 2010 5:06 PM CDT up reply actions
You're right... mostly
A 16 team superconference isn’t really a conference. It’s really two micro conferences with scheduling and revenue sharing ties. Under some plans crossover games don’t even count towards winning your division. And any cross division rivalries will disappear quickly seeing as the teams will hardly play.
That being said I don’t really mind all that. I see the above issues of the superconferences as the bitter taste to go along with the medicine that college football needs. Because if the current 120 FBS schools can condense down to a handful (say 8 or so) conferences it makes it much easier create a de facto 16 team playoff. Two division winners per conference play in conference championships. 8 conference champions meet in 4 current BCS bowls. Add a semi round hosted by more rotating bowls. And then the NCG. You only have to extend the season by one week in Jan and you can keep all the lesser bowls for everybody else. I think this is the end goal of the whole process.
by HawkeyeInExile on Jun 5, 2010 5:27 PM CDT up reply actions
a few thoughts
1) I hate any conference with mroe than 10 11 members.
2) I hate the idea of the pac 10 or big 10 or the two combined eating a conference
3) but if it was going to happen, I wouldn’t mind if the Big Ten got Kansas along with Nebraska and Missouri. Even if it doesn’t make life a bit harder for our basketball Spartans. We need even numbers again.
4) but I really really really wish it wouldn’t happen. I think all of this is completely stupid.
12 is okay
Beyond that things just get stupid, though. My preference, if I got to blow the whole thing up and set up from scratch? 6 20-team “conferences” with promotion and relegation between the upper and lower divisions within each; full round-robin in each division with a round-robin among the six upper-division champions to decide the title. But that ain’t gonna happen.
Honestly, truly radical changes like that one might be fun. But the “radical” idea of a 14- or 16-team league that functions as two divisions with a scheduling and revenue-sharing agreement … that’s not only not especially radical, it’s a horrendous idea.

by 






















