I agree. The Big 10 might take KU. If not, the MWC is probably the best basketball conference for a conference that has football as well other than the Big 10/Pac Ten/ACC/Big East/SEC. Maybe almost on par with the SEC after Kentucky.

I would be shocked if Kansas doesn't end up in a BCS level conference. I know there are rumors of KU being tied with KSU, but I don't believe the Kansas Board of Regents are naive enough to think they can force a BCS conference to take both. I'd love to see KU and KSU stick together for rivalry reasons, but I think they'll split up if they have to. And given the fact that KSU doesn't have a lot of clout they may have to. KU at least has the KC market and a national following in basketball. They'll find a home some where.

DTR,

That list for Pac-10 schools is being reported on quite a few sites including the Texas site. Wonder if they all got it from the same original source or from multiple independant sources. I hope it is true as this would be a great move for the Pac-10.

While I'm not surprised there's talk of a major expansion of the Pac-10 involving Big-12 schools, I am a little surprised to see Tech and the Oklahoma schools mentioned as invites. Obviously Oklahoma has a tremendous football program that would add definite appeal to new TV negotiations, but the school itself does not fit the academic profile that the Pac-10 aspires to - it's not an AAU member (7 of 10 Pac schools are), and it's not at the highest tier of research universities (rated an RU/H by Carnegie; all Pac-10 schools are RU/VH). Same with Oklahoma State.

Because of that, I could see the Kansas schools being targeted above the Oklahoma schools. Kansas obviously brings with it an elite basketball program and is itself an AAU university and rated an RH/VH; Kansas State is also an RH/VH.

The Big 12 commish just cancelled a presser for tomorrow where they were supposed to address expansion issues. I wonder if the Pac-10 talk caught them off guard:

"Beebe abruptly cancels presser" - Behind the Stripes - ColumbiaTribune.com

I think OU is a better school than people give it credit for. They have made a lot of strides to attract good students. I'm an alum, so I'm biased, and I'm not naive enough to think that it's an elite school in the nation, but there are some good things.

I also think that OU makes more sense because of national football appeal, and a generally pretty good athletic department. OSU and Tech are the bigger surprises, in my opinion. I think KU makes more sense than Tech, but I can see Tech as being the bridge through New Mexico (not that it makes any difference).

OSU is kind of a weird one too, but they bring Pickens' money and good facilities. Plus, it sets up a nice road trip the way the Pac 10 likes to do things.

Another reason for the Oklahoma schools is that they are a college sports market. I think that OKC is battling each year with Colombus, OH for the top-rated TV market for college athetics. People will watch OU, but also care what else is going on in the country.

Colorado AD says he expects that CU and five other schools will receive an invitation to the Pac 10.

Bohn says CU, five other Big 12 schools likely to be invited to Pac-10 - Buffzone

Beebe has been 'caught off guard' continuously over his entire reign. He was oblivious to the risks with the Big 12's conference setup until it was far too late to do anything about it. It seemed like he was the only one who couldn't see the light at the end of the tunnel was a train.

The setup with the Pac-10 and most of the South schools seems like a match made in heaven. It also all but guarantees that the Big Ten will go to 14-16 teams and greatly increases the chances that Notre Dame will reconsider their position or be left out of the power structure.

Good to see the PAC-10 making an effort to expand their conference. Im not sure Im in favor of it but I dont think it's a bad thing either. It would be funny if the PAC-10 takes those 6 teams and then Notre Dame decides to go to the Big-11 and they stop at 12 teams.

Don't misunderstand - I'm not arguing that the student academic experience at Oklahoma is not top-notch. It's important to note that what things like the U.S. News & World Report ratings are evaluating and what things like the Carnegie Foundation classifications are evaluating are different.

The U.S. News rankings are more relevant to the student and their experience.

What the Carnegie Foundation is evaluating is more relevant to what the Pac-10 is most concerned about - a school's status as a research university and what that means in terms of research funding and information sharing.

And in that regard, the Oklahoma schools are not rated as highly as all of the Pac-10 schools, whereas Texas, Texas A&M, Colorado, Kansas and Kansas State are. Nebraska and Mizzou too, FWIW.

Now, maybe the football appeal of Oklahoma is enough to trump that - could be. But don't underestimate the influence that research funding will have in all of this, as it's a big part of the makeup of the Pac-10.

Just curious. Why would that even be an option assuming the Pac-10 move? The Big Ten would still hold the cards they want at that point. They could be one of two conferences to basically hand pick their power conference much like the Pac-10 appears ready to do. If they move to 12, they risk allowing other conferences to pick up the power schools from the Big 12 North and are then left in a position where they may be the last conference to move to 16 teams and not have their optimal choices. I suppose you're correct that it would be funny because it would be a boneheaded move of the highest caliber, which isn't something that would be expected of that conference's leadership.

Because they do the math and it results in a higher per team pay out for the conference members?

Not saying the math does work out that way...but who knows...

But they likely will have to expand to 16 teams anyway. That's the way the dominoes are going to fall. They allow a conference like Conference USA to make a big power play and pick up some major teams. Or the SEC hand-picks a few. The Big Ten then has to figure out how to squeeze water out of a rock by looking over the leftovers to play catch-up.

I'm going to give the Big Ten leadership credit that they're not that short-sighted. It just makes no sense given what we know about how things appear to be falling.

For the Pac 10 to make more money, they needed to go to 16. Well, they could have gone to 12 and picked up two Texas schools. But that would kind of make things weird with two schools way out of the way. Texas A&M apparently has travel concerns, and those wouldn't be eased if the only team within its state and any border state was Texas. But instead they get six schools...six in the central time zone who can be paired with two in the mountain time zone. This allows for games that can start at the beginning of the central prime time AND games that start toward the middle of the pacific prime time. Plus, they add Dallas, Oklahoma City, San Antonio, Denver, Houston. They OWN west of the Missisippi.

The Big 10 on the other hand already has a cable network that is pretty successful. Getting Notre Dame would assure the teams of a big raise. Getting anyone else after that would dilute the product. KC would be nice, but it's a media market that is one after Salt Lake City. There's no reason to have 16 teams if the members are making more money with 12. The Pac 10 couldn't do it, so they had to go big. The Big 10, with Notre Dame, wouldn't have to do that. They would get every home in America with Notre Dame and they wouldn't have to share with anyone else.

But there's no way to get Notre Dame into the Big Ten without the threat of a consolidating move to 4-5 mega-conferences. Notre Dame doesn't gain enough in a 12 team Big Ten. That's been the hangup the hold time and the reason that a final decision hasn't been made. If it appears that the Big Ten is only going to invite one team (would likely be Mizzou if it wasn't Notre Dame), then Notre Dame is more than happy to remain in the Big East because there's no threat of the Big East falling down around them. In order for the Big Ten to land Notre Dame, it has to push some buttons to make significant dents in the Big East.

Andy Staples via Twitter:
It would be interesting if they offered Texas, ATM, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State.

Can't see that flying with the membership, just can't see them swallowing the two lower profile teams to get the big ones.

My opinion is about as valid as the blogospheres (aka "not very") but that's my gut, I can't see that creating anything except years of steady complaining from one of the most fervent conference fan bases in the country.

Historically, A&M has been closer to the SEC than the SWC/Big 12. Sure, there is the massive rivalry with Austin, but their coaches have more often than not either gone to SEC schools, or came from SEC schools. (Bear Bryant, Gene Stallings, Billy Gillespie, Jackie Sherrill, all off the top of my head). There is more of an SEC vibe in College Station than there is anywhere else in the Big 12.

And by the same token, the academic profile of Texas would lead me to believe they wouldn't have a big interest in the SEC, and the Texas coaches have made it known they don't like the idea of joining the SEC and dealing with they perceive as rampant dirty recruiting there. The Pac-10 seems like the best bet for Texas if the Big-12 implodes...

I don't think SEC will do anything, to be honest. They have a big contract and they have the most cohesive group of fans in the country. The rah-rah SEC shit won't work here. I know I don't much care for the rest of the Big 12 except to the extent it helps OU's teams on the field. I certainly wouldn't care about the SEC either. I think it would be a disaster for many schools that could get invited there.

Texas A&M would get into it though. I agree with cartman that they are more SEC than Big 12, and certainly more than the Pac 10.

I know A&M has been down for awhile, but I don't know that I would consider them tagalongs. The part about the four B12 teams was my own speculation, but if you are dipping a toe into the state of Texas (and who knows if the SEC has any interest in doing so), A&M is a pretty good choice (if Texas isn't willing).

Here is the latest from Michigan's Rival site:

If we're dealing in a foursome, I could see the SEC trying to take in Miami, Florida State, Clemson, and Georgia Tech before taking the four schools from the Big 12.

I'd wager they'd take Oklahoma and Texas any day of the week ahead of the other schools.

If Texas and Notre Dame are among the Big 10 invites in the end, that's really bad news for Nebraska.

Most of the info that I have come across indicates that Nebraska is a shoo-in to be invited to the Big Ten and that they may well get an offer to join for the 2011 season, with the rest of expansion to be sorted later.

I think Kansas is the most prominent school that is in danger of not having a seat when the music stops.

Yes, but most of that info is assuming that Notre Dame is staying out. If they come in along with Texas, that all gets reshuffled.

So, the Big10 got the Pac 10 to be the bad guys . And the Big10 will help out those poor schools that were abandoned.

Big10 wins again.

I am starting to think more and more that this was leaked by Texas, essentially to tell anyone else they're not going to leverage us by threatening to leave, because we can all leave everyone else in the cold and take five teams with us.

"what we know about how things appear"

Ha ha. So, nothing again? There are like 50+ scenarios out there. Nobody knows how things are falling, except for maybe a few conference king makers. Depending on which site you read the Big Ten is adding anyone from Nebraska to Virginia or Notre Dame and no one. But here's a possible scenario where the Big Ten does nothing or adds Notre Dame and quits:

-The Pac Ten does what they do.

-Notre Dame gets spooked and lets the Big Ten know that they are in.

-THe SEC decides to do nothing because what they really wanted to do was add Texas. Clemson adds nothing from a television perspective. Florida won't agree to add Miami because they don't want to play them every year. While Georgia and Florida might have a couple of million reasons each to add Georgia Tech and Florida State, a 14 team league doesn't really do all that much for anyone except cause you to split the pie two more ways.

-The ACC is thrilled to survive in tact. They stand pat.

-The Big East is simply trying to survive and have no ability to add anyone.

-The Big Ten does the math. Notre Dame gets them a lot of cable boxes or a maybe a revamped contract with some NBC exposure. They do the math and splitting the pie 12 ways gets them more than adding Nebraska and pick your three dwarves.

Point is, every team's rivals site thinks they know what is happening to their team, and nobody knows anything. Super conferences sound great but no one knows if they make a ton of sense financially.

Again, ticket sales and alumni contributions still drive athletic departments. TV may be gaining on those two, but it is still third. You can bet each school is doing that math before they cast their vote in their respective conference.

If this happens, so long Big 12. Without Texas and Texas A&M, the Big 12 is done for.

Kansas is definitely one of the schools that could be on the outside looking in especially if other teams are packaged together (OSU and Texas Tech). I still hold out hope that the Pac 10 and Big 12 can work something out.

I wouldn't particularly disagree with that take on it ... but I don't believe there are many SEC fans who would consider A&M "SEC enough" to be a member of the conference. And Oklahoma State? OMG, the outrage would be pretty intense.

I don't disagree that the fans won't like anyone. I don't see how they'd take in Miami though, they aren't SEC enough either. I'm thinking more good fans and Southern when you say "SEC-enough."

If it's strength of program, I'd beg to differ--especially on A&M. It's not like Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Ole Miss, and Missisippi State are any better (and really, not better than Oklahoma State). Auburn is probably traditionally about the same.

The SEC is a very strong conference, but I think it's mainly due to loyalty among fans to their teams and to their conference. I also think it's because the strong teams are very traditional (or is Florida) and are able to sustain that year-in, year-out (in part because of the weaker teams who are viewed as stronger because of they are part of the conference and are rarely so bad as to not be able to put up a few wins a year).

Difference being, those teams are in the SEC & Oklahoma State isn't. The whole "we can talk about 'em 'cause they're kinfolk but you better not say anything about 'em yourself" kind of deal.

Back in '07 when OkSt stayed close to UGA for a while (before Georgia won 35-14) you'd have thought the Dawgs had just lost to Furman by 3 TD's to hear the fans afterwards.

Call it arrogance, call it whatever, but there's a perception among a large percentage of SEC fans that a team like that (decent but not historically great & not from a conference they're familiar with beyond the big names) shouldn't even be on the field with any SEC team with a national profile (i.e. any team in the conference not from Mississippi, Nashville, or Lexington)

Don't get me wrong, I'm not going to stand up for Oklahoma State's program. They are historically terrible and have had a few (stress, a few) good years of late, and they were good in the late 1980s because of Thomas and Sanders. Other than that, their bad reputation is well-deserved in any part of the country.

So JiMGA, if Conference Armageddon goes down and the SEC was forced to add 4... who are their ideal 4 and what order do teams fall in?
-Texas (but it wants to go Big 10 or Pac-10 for academic/recruiting reasons)
-Oklahoma
-Florida State
-Clemson/Ga Tech (don't add new markets or a national profile, but each a traditional rival of a strong team)
-Miami (Florida hates them for whatever reason)
-Texas A&M (I'd actually put them higher. Fan base backlash, but adding a team in Texas with 60k+ enrollment is huge)
-Who's next?

Will the SEC just assume that if shit goes down they can wait it all out, then force Florida to swallow their pride and add the ACC foursome (none are a threat to be stolen by any other conference as far as I can tell). Or would they want to be proactive and go after OU/A&M with 2 of the ACC 4? What if the Pac-10 makes its move to 16 and then one (or more) of the ACC 4 turns them down?

One other question - if the Pac-10 actually puts out offers to 5 schools, can they require it to be a package deal or does each individual school have the option to accept/decline? It sounds like Colorado already has 1 foot out the door, could they accept and move to the Pac-10 before Texas commits to a direction?

Disagree. There's some idiots out there who are pretty ill-informed (the Frank the Tank post that someone put up is a prime example as he admitted he was a 'hack' after last night's news), but there's a pretty good concensus from most reliable media and other sources how things will fall and what teams will be the primary targets. The 'Notre Dame will be the only invite' scenario just doesn't hold water at all. If that's all they were going to do and it was so easy, they would have done that years ago. The only way Notre Dame is going is if the Big East is hit. It's really quite simple.

I'd also note that the Rivals writer at the Texas site who broke this info is very reliable and has some very good connections within the Texas program.

This is a tremendous reach, but if we are reaching for the SEC's ideal 4, I suspect access into North Carolina and Virginia would fall just below Texas. If the Big 10 somehow decided to take a big bite out of the ACC (say they add Notre Dame, and Notre Dame wants Boston College, Maryland, and UVA). If the SEC added UNC, Duke, NC State, and VPI -- that would probably be close to their ideal move.

I see both sides of this issue...the Pac 10 taking the 6 would prob. force the Big 10 to take Mizzou, but from what I hear my ASU would get grouped with all the big 12 south teams and I dont see that helping us athletically at all. Right now in basketball we are a top 3 program, and while were certainly down in football, i dont see a huge gap between ASU and a UofA or a Stanford at present...but drop them into a division with OU and UT, and the prospect of rising back up the ranking takes a big hit...they might cope, they might not, but that sounds like a huge blow to their winning ability.

Now mizzou, in the divisions ive seen the big 10 predicted to break into, would fare much better...much much better.

I've seen the arguments, but I just don't see how the Pac 10 expansion forces the Big Ten to do anything. Even with six new teams, the Pac 10 is not going to be making as much, per team, as the Big Ten teams.

Television dollars are driving expansion. As digamma articulated above, the Big Ten is probably near or at peak efficiency/value, while the Pac 10 and Big 12 are/were looking to catch up. Unless a new team or set of teams grows the Big Ten's pie, they have little reason to feed another mouth(s).

On a side note, it will be interesting to see what some of the bowl matchups look like if there is significant expansion (and we assume that bowls still exist) and we are left with only four BCS conferences.

I wonder how the old guards of the Pac 10 and Big Ten would feel if/when we see an Oklahoma vs Nebraska Rose Bowl? :)

Hmm ... just combining everything I've seen/heard/read with my own gut I'd say it's something like

1) Texas, cause that's money.

1b) {insert long pause here to indicate the gap in true desire to add anyone else}

2 & 3) Clemson & Ga Tech seem to be a package deal for some reason. Notice that you rarely if ever see a combination mentioned like Tech+Miami or Clemson+FSU, the Tigers & Jackets seem to always be paired together. My own guess is that UGA (and possibly SC) might like that notion and that they want them to be on board with the expansion.

4) FSU seems like the 4th team in the preference order but only because realistically if you do 3 then you gotta do 4. I don't sense any particular enthusiasm for adding them but I feel like they'd be the top pick from the remaining options.

The team that never gets mentioned which I personally think would actually be a pretty fair fit is West Virginia. I don't get any sense that they're even a remote consideration but I think they'd actually fit right in quicker than anyone farther west.

There was an article out, when this story had a little more heat and they were acting like the SEC would have to move to 16 in response to the Big Ten, that quoted an SEC insider as saying that their short list was Florida State, Georgia Tech, Clemson and WVU. I don't think I ever commented on it, because it seems like too much of a pipe dream for us.

Almost heaven, really ;)

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content...s.html?sid=101

This is starting to get more interesting. Looks like there's maybe some smoke. The Pac 10 realizing they have to act fast, otherwise the crown jewel of their expansion plans might have already jumped ship. It also helps explain why Texas Tech...the political risk, while maybe not all real, is certainly high enough not to risk it.

MBBF--what do you think Texas going to the Big Ten does to Missouri? If they took Notre Dame and Texas who is the 14th team? I don't think they go to 16 if they get those two. If it's A&M, that's bad for the rest of us.

I'd say that Ga Tech, Clemson and FSU all fall into the same boat in terms of SEC expansion. They each have an in state rival that they play every year in the SEC. If that SEC team could bring them into a conference schedule it frees up a non-conference game, and adds a home game for those teams. That was my reference to a couple of million reasons for Florida and Georgia to support FSU and Ga Tech.

Miami is the odd ball here. While they arguably add a new television market, it's not clear they are a driver in the Miami market (or if that is a lucrative college football market). And Florida doesn't want to play them every year.

Have read the same thing about the Texas guy, but of course the source was another Rivals writer.

I haven't seen any "concensus" in the media, much less pretty good "concensus" or any reliable media sources.

And this morning we have a report that says the Washington AD says a full merger between the Pac Ten and Big 12 is on the table. So, you're still guessing at this point like everyone else.

The writer at the Texas Rivals site is a former AP writer for the Dallas Morning News. Only reason he left was that they stopped sending beat writers to road games, so he went to an internet portal that would allow him to do so. He's very credible and has a TON of connections.

The Washington AD is speaking out of his ass if he thinks that. There's no way in hell that all 12 B12 members and all of the P10 merge together. It's not going to happen.

This from ESPN's college football blog. I assume the "Tech problem" is its non-AAU status and the idea that teh Big 10 would have to take them in any deal to get Texas?

Is the meeting still tomorrow?

I don't think A&M is the package deal that everyone thought it might be. My understanding continues to be that Mizzou officials KNOW that they will receive an invite. The uncertainty continues to be who those other teams will be. Let's assume that I'm correct for the sake of the discussion. If the Big Ten were to land Notre Dame, Texas, and Mizzou, they would land a 'national' team in ND and would essentially steal the top two TV markets (by state) in the B12 footprint and put them in their conference. That would make perfect sense given what we know about their goals with expansion.

The Pac 10 is going to land some good teams regardless of what Texas does. There's plenty to choose from in the West depending on what their priorities are.

The Big 12 meeting today should provide plenty of drama. Ah, to be a fly on the wall............

I just wish they'd get it the fuck over with. I'm tired of waiting.

Clear message from the Big 12 membership today regarding the Big 12 Basketball Tournament site. They have awarded the 2012, 2013, and 2014 tournaments all to Kansas City.

Message: Don't leave. Here's a bone to keep you happy since we're moving the football championship permanently to Dallas.

Big 12 awards Kansas City with men's, women's basketball tourneys - KansasCity.com

He didn't say it was going to happen. He said it was among the things being discussed, which is probably true. Still waiting to hear what the "concensus" plan is.

The PAC-10 is expanding. The original thought was Colorado and Utah. Since Texas started letting themselves be courted by the PAC-10, that pushed up the ante

Good interview of Chris Brown (OrangeBloods.com) if you're interested. Go to the following webpage and the interview is listed under the 'Between the Lines' section of the page.........

Sports Radio 810 WHB / Podcasts

Quick summary of some of his comments.......

-The six teams previously mentioned will receive a Pac-10 bid and will have 6 months to make their decision.

-OU and A&M are leery of Texas's need for their own network. Both of those schools will require that Texas abandon any school network aspirations before they consider the Pac-10 membership offer.

-A&M has already talked with the SEC about possible membership.

-Missouri will get a bid to the Big 10. Nebraska may not.

So says the expert in speaking out of one's ass.

Here's the full context of the quote:

"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," Woodward said Thursday afternoon. "All possibilities are viable and open for discussion."

And there's no reason to think that's not true. A "full merger" could simply mean that the two conferences join forces in terms of TV and bowl negotiations and schedule regular cross-conference games in all their major sports.

Even if the Pac-10 goes big and tries to add 6 more teams, it would really be 2 conferences operating as one entity - the teams in the Pac-8 would probably not be playing teams in the Southwest-8 very frequently.

Texas is clearly the big prize out there that both the Big Ten and the Pac-10 want. Tech certainly would get left behind otherwise, so which ever conference takes Texas has to take Tech too. A&M is good enough on their own that they could probably move to another BCS conference without being strictly tethered to Texas and Tech, but they will likely be offered along with Texas and Tech.

I wouldn't be so sure that the Pac-10 can't catch up to the Big Ten in terms of revenue when they negotiate their new TV deal(s) if they are able to pull of a major expansion that includes Texas...

That estimate is already out there. It was mentioned in the interview I linked a few posts back. The estimate is that the "Pac 16" would land a contract that would pay each team roughly $20M/year. So not quite as much as the Big Ten, but definitely an improvement over what those Big 12 members are getting right now.

The full merger option is out the window at this point. The attempt to make that merger and the behind the scenes discussions between the AD's at those meetings are apparantly the driving force behind the breakup of the Big 12. That's where the invitations to the 6 teams came up. As was mentioned in the interview, I don't think there's any question that the Pac 10 went to those meetings and realized that a non-conference merger would be a disaster given the inept leadership in the Big 12.

I guess my point is let's not over analyze his words - when he says "full merger with the Big-12", he may well mean taking as many Big-12 teams in as makes sense, i.e. bringing in 6 teams rather than just Texas and A&M.

I don't doubt that the Big-12 is on the verge of losing teams - Mizzou wants in to the Big Ten, Colorado wants in to the Pac-10 - and Texas is the key to what happens to the rest of the conference if any teams start peeling off.

Took this from another forum, I believe it's once again from UT's Rivals Site:

Found this on another site

--------------------------


Scene: It's lunchtime at College Football High School. And at CFHS, everyone eats together. Except for those short bus kids from the Sun Belt. They eat in a Teflon covered room and are only allowed to use spoons for safety's sake. But CFHS is not unlike any other High School in America, all the groups stick together. The Big Ten, PAC-10, SEC, ACC, and Big East all sit apart from one another at separate tables, telling each other how crappy the other tables are. Over by one of the windows we join Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech, all gussied up in their cheerleader uniforms, sitting down to lunch. As they get seated, their fellow cheerleader Colorado come running up....

Texas: A&M, you're such a whore.

A&M: Eat me *****, you got lucky. I'll be captain nex.....

Colorado: Ohmigod! Ohmigod! Ohmigod!

Oklahoma: What?

Colorado: You guys are. Not. Going. To. Believethisss.

Texas Tech: What!?

Colorado: Omigod! /almost faints from hyperventilating/

Texas: ***** if you don't tell me what the **** you're talking about I'm going to punch you in your ovaries.

/Oklahoma and Oklahoma State roll their eyes, but silently agree with Texas/

Colorado: Alright. Ready? I just heard that the six of us are totally going to be invited out by... wait for it.... the Pac-10! /squeals/

Texas Tech: Ohmigod! NO WAY!

Colorado: Yeah! It's totally true. We're all getting invites. No more of this Big XII bull****. And the best part is the PAC-10 guys are totally RICH!!

Oklahoma State: Thank God, I'm sick of hanging out with you *****es every Saturday. It's almost like someone makes us all hang out together, all the time. /glares at Texas/

Texas: Whatever, Colorado.

Colorado: What!? You're not excited?

Texas: Why should I be? I totally dated the PAC-10 a few years ago, but they're lahoosers. I could've gone steady with the PAC-10, or I could hang out with my girls. I totally chose you guys. /smiles fakest of all smiles/

Texas Tech: Don't give us that line of bull****. They dumped your ass after they found out your were stuffing your revenues bra.

Texas: **** you, Tech. I totally dumped them. You're just pissed off that you wouldn't even be in the flag corps much less a Big XII member Cheerleader if you weren't my cousin, so deal with it. And while you're at it, get me a Diet Coke, *****.

Texas Tech: /grumbles, goes to get Diet Coke, intends to spit in it first/



Oklahoma: So where did you hear about this? Spill it.

Colorado: I heard it from that guy! /points to unathletic CFHS newspaper geek/

A&M: From HIM!?

Oklahoma: Just from him? Are you ****ing kidding me? He doesn't know anything. That ******* told everyone I lost my head coach virginity to Notre Dame this summer. That's your source!?

Colorado: Calm down Oklahoma, it's not just him. Everyone's talking about it. I heard from people who were hanging out with the PAC-10 all week that this is totally going to happen.

Oklahoma State: Oh christ... here comes Iowa State.

/Iowa State rolls up in motorized wheelchair, dressed in cheerleader uniform/

Iowa State: /voice box crackles/ WHAT'S THIS CRAP I HEAR ABOUT YOU *****ES GOING OUT WITH THE PAC-10? WHY DO I HAVE TO HEAR THIS FROM TEDDY GREENSTEIN? I THOUGHT WE WERE FRIENDS. /static/

Colorado: Calm down Iowa State, we just found out about it. Sorry they didn't invite you to party.

Iowa State: I DON'T NEED YOUR PITY. WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO THE CHEERLEADING TEAM? /squak/

Texas: Nothing's going to happen to the cheerleading team Iowa State. No one is going to party with the PAC-10.

Colorado: WHAT!?

Texas: I've told you before, my Dad owns a dealership, and if you *****es want to have a nice car to drive around in and cool parties to go to, you're doing what I want.

Oklahoma: Whatever... /gazes off into the distance, wishes she were somewhere, anywhere else/

Oklahoma State: You know you're not the only one with money Texas. My Uncle Pickens left me some money too. I can get my own car.

Texas: Ha! A lot of good it's done you to. Even with the new practice facility boob job the best you can do is the Holiday Bowl. Ever think that if you weren't hanging out with me you wouldn't even get invited there? You were popular for a minute, but when everyone found out the twins were plastic it all went away, didn't it.

Oklahoma State: I hate you. /fights back tears/

Colorado: You're not ruining this for me Texas. I'm doing whatever I want.

Texas: Fine. Do what you want. But when you come back here trying to be friends, smelling like salmon and wear cords made out of hemp, don't think we're going to talk with you.

Iowa State: /chirp/ I KNEW WE'D ALL BE FRIENDS FOR EVER.

/Nebraska and Missouri, also in their cheerleading outfits, walk by with the Big Ten talking and giggling/

Nebraska: Hi everyone! We'll see you a practice. /Missouri waves, continues walking/

Iowa State: HI IOWA. YOU GOING TO CALL ME THIS WEEKEND? /crackle/

/Iowa shields face with hand, all his Big Ten friends laugh at him/

/Iowa State turns her wheelchair back to the table/

Iowa State: HE'S MY COUSIN. EVERY NOW AND THEN HE GETS DRUNK AND HE LETS ME MAKE OUT WITH HIM.

Colorado: Oh MY GOD, Iowa State. Shut up!

Iowa State: HEY COLORADO, REMEMBER BACK IN 2007 WHEN WE MADE OUT!?

Colorado: SHUT UP!

Iowa State: HA HA HA HA HA. I OWN YOU *****.

Oklahoma State: So what's up with Nebraska and Missouri hanging out with those Big Ten guys?

A&M: Oh my God, it's like Missouri can't get enough of them. All Missouri does is talk about how great the Big Ten is. All the Big Ten would have to do is say "Big Ten Network" "boo" and her legs would be in the air.

Texas Tech: Not like Nebraska's any different. Nebraska asked me what kind of thong is easiest to get out of. If the Big Ten asks, we'll never see those two again.

Texas: I don't like the Big Ten. A few years ago I thought we were friends but they totally blew me off. Now that my revenues boobs are big, they're all over me again.

A&M: It all comes back to you, doesn't it?

Texas: You got something to say, *****?

A&M: Yeah, I do. I've been talking with the SEC and I don't need this **** anymore.

Oklahoma: /in heaviest possible sarcasm/ You're going with the SEC?

A&M: That's right. Hi honey! /waves/

/SEC continues eating lunch, carries on as if crickets are chirping/

A&M: See, we're totally steady.

Oklahoma State: You're an idiot.

Texas: Oh jesus, is Kansas trying to sell test answers again?

/Kansas, seeing a teacher, quickly sits down at the Big XII table/

Kansas: Hey everyone, what's going on?

A&M: What the hell's the matter with you? Aren't you in enough trouble already?

Kansas: What are you talking about? I'm just supplying study supplements. There's nothing wrong with that.

Oklahoma: If by "study supplements" you mean the actual test key, then yes, there is something wrong with that.

Texas Tech: Look, just because you'll sell your panties to anyone with a dollar fifty doesn't mean you can do it. We've got reputations to keep here.

/whole table giggles/

Iowa State: HA HA HA HA

Colorado: I hate you Kansas. I can't wait to start hanging out with the PAC-10 so I never have to see your ass again.

Kansas: Yeah, I heard about that. Let me ask you a simple question, genius. Have you actually talked to anyone in the PAC-10 about this?

Colorado: Well... um... no.

Kansas: You're an idiot. And you're stuck with me *****.

/fin/

Also, here is the letter regarding the Big 12 from Iowa State:

That letter from ISU is actually kind of sad. They are not even going to be a draw for a revamped Mountain West. Hello MAC?

I can see the new MWC looking like this

Air Force
BYU
SDSU
Fresno
Boise St
TCU
Kansas
KSU
Utah
TCU
Baylor
UNLV
UNR
Utah

CSU UNM UH look to be the big schools left out

Gold

There was a good article I read last night estimating that an expanded Pac-10 (Pac-16) would get over 20 million per team with its own network as Los Angeles and Texas provide such huge markets. Along with rest of the teams, they would have 7 of the top 20 TV markets in the country.

DTR,

I've also seen that Texas A&M is the most likely team to turn down the Pac-10. I'm sure a suitable replacement can be found if they choose to go in another direction.

I'm sure Conference USA is also going to be a consideration for some of these 'left out' schools. MWC and CUSA both have a chance to help themselves out a bit with these changes.

I think A&M is doing whatever they can to get in the SEC. Not sure why, but I just think it's the case. If so, I think Kansas would end up in the Pac 10, but I could be wrong.

The latest from CFT:

I honestly have no idea what to think after all these stories we're seeing from the media. I think Kansas would like to stay tied to Texas for recruiting reasons. The big question for Kansas is would they split off from KSU? I know what Kansas officials have said regarding KSU, but I think if push came to shove Kansas would have to separate.

Kirk Bohls of the Austin Statesman who reportedly is very connected with UT has said that he has a source who says it is 60/40 in favor of all 3 Texas teams joining the Pac-10. Seems to be a lot of smoke.

If the big 12 blows up I would hope the MWC picks up Kansas, K-State and Boise State.

Though to secure an AQ spot in the BCS Boise and Fresno State would be the better pickups, but the Kansas Schools bring the Hoops.

It will be interesting to see what happens. When all is said and done I think only Boise State joins the MWC, which still should get an AQ spot for the conference no problem since their record the last 2 years and next season will count.

Saw this reposted on a WVU board. I'm not even sure where it's originally from, I assume it's the Texas board that broke the original UT to Pac story:


Combined with the leaked emails about how the Big Ten wants Texas but ran into a "Tech problem," it does seem like Delaney and co. might be seeing this blow up in their face a little bit. I think they expected to possibly be competing with the SEC, but the PAC 10 is making a smart move and trying to steal their Texas thunder. Then again, if this move goes through, and it forces ND to the B10, they'd likely be happy with the end result anyway.

If A&M says no the Pac-10 will then ask Utah to replace them. It give Colorado a "travel partner" and gives the new conference the Salt Lake City TV market too along with the markets they pick up in Texas.

I know this is a smart money move for the Pac 10, but I think it could end up being a pretty bad for the existing Pac 10 schools in football, particularly with USC having (at best) an unproven coach and going through restrictions.

The Pac 10 always seemed like a pretty cohesive group of schools (UCLA and USC banter aside). It will be interesting to see how Texas and Oklahoma (particularly Texas) try to fit in.

The PAC-10 is like the Bundy's (From MWC). They hate each other to no end, but generally speaking, have disdain for people from the outside talking down about the PAC-10. Since the schools are so isolated from each other, the smaller ones need the PAC-10 to exist.

As for football, they'll be fine.

Yeah I think Boise State joins the MWC. I've been hearing it for quite a while now.

USC is going to shock people this year. I think the new coaching staff has added a discipline that this team hasn't seen in a few years.

Boise should get their offer at the MWC meetings this months from what I have been reading. Of course they would accept that asap I believe.

One thing I am curious about with this expansion is if Kansas is left to the MWC, would they be able to be an independent hoops team? I am not even sure that is allowed by the NCAA for hoops, but I am not going to pretend like I know a ton about that.

I just cannot see how Kansas playing in the MWC would even be fun, even if K-State and Baylor wind up in the conference. It'd be a blood bath 95% of their conference games.

KU would obviously be the best team, but I think that the other teams are better than you might think--definitely better than Memphis' opponents in the new CUSA. I also think that KU has a good chance of raising the bar in the league and those teams could step up to the challenge. New Mexico, BYU, and Utah are all solid teams. If you add in KU, KSU, and ISU or Baylor, I think that the league would be very strong--probably better than the SEC in hoops.

AFAIK it's still allowed, there were six D1 indies last season in men's hoops (Seattle, Longwood, CS-Bakersfield, NC Central, Savannah State, , & SIU-Edwardsville).

Of those, only the last three have announced plans to join a conference, with NC-C and Sav State headed to the MEAC in 2010 and SIU-E already admitted to the OVC but keeping an indy schedule until the 2011-12 season.

Actually there are (or were until last year) quite a few D-I independents in basketball. None of them were very good and while eligible for the NCAA tournament, never had any chance to make it. Most of them were transitional D-I members coming up from lower divisions, such as North Carolina Central or Texas-Pan American or North Dakota. Most of these independents eventually coalesced into a brand new league last year, the Great West (won't be eligible for an autobid until 2020, though).

At any rate, Kansas would be an interesting study because if they were to go independent for a bit, I don't think there could be a more powerful one in NCAA history and it seems legitimately possible that they could make the NCAAs without the challenge of playing in a conference wearing on them.

I do think, though, that Kansas could not last long as an independent. Without a conference, a team would face severe scheduling problems. Even one like Kansas who would face difficulties in getting anybody of serious clout coming to Lawrence except as a home-and-home series on occasion and especially not after other conference seasons start (who wants to go to Lawrence in the middle of a conference grind?). The Big 12 gave Kansas schedule strength and big home games because it meant that teams like Texas or Oklahoma or Missouri had to go to Lawrence every year or every other year. Without a conference, Kansas could not compel anyone to come to them unless they wanted to. Without the marquee matchups in the mid- and late-season over the years, it would be harder and harder for Kansas to recruit. So, Kansas, for it's long term health would need to find a conference fairly quickly. They could probably survive a year or two, but after that it's going to be tough. The best choices are not very palatable, but KU would need to suck it up some if they want to stay where they are.

At least they aren't K-State, Baylor, or Iowa State, though. Iowa State, especially, is in a really bad spot since Iowa can't really compel the Big Ten to let them in. The WAC might be willing to take them (they're already a stretched out league, so Iowa State isn't so ridiculous to include there), but the MWC is probably a longshot, especially if the MWC can land the Kansas schools. I'm not sure if Iowa State might not be better off falling back to I-AA in football and then moving to the Missouri Valley, for example. They'd be instantly competitive in all sports in that league and probably have a better chance of making the NCAAs than having to fight their way through the Big 12 every year.

I think the best thing for ISU would be go to the MAC personally. They'd be in the thick of the conference in football and hoops, plus geographically it makes sesne.

Notre Dame in the 70's was pretty darned good. Marquette was an independent during the entire Al McGuire era, and on a lesser scale DePaul was independent during Rey Meyer's entire tenure there.

Yeah, you're right. I knew there were some big guns in the 1970s, but completely blanked on whether they were independent or not. I still think Kansas would probably (during the first couple of years anyway) be better than those teams were as an independent.

If we go "minor realignment"- Big 10 picks a couple off from the Big East and Big XII and no one else does anything, then the Big XII picks up a couple of TCU-level schools and moves on.

If we go 16 team mega conferences, Kansas is screwed. The Big 10 and SEC have the big sticks and no one can pick off anyone from their revenue. Both of those conferences make $3B while the next best is the Big XII at $500M. No one picks anyone off of the Pac 10 because of geography and they seem the third strongest.

I put a little pen to paper on this a couple of days ago but it's at work. Basically you have the Pac 10 + the 6 they want from the Big XII. Perhaps the Texas schools don't agree and in that case, Kansas and Kansas State find a home. The Big 10 picks off Nebraska, Mizzou, (maybe) Notre Dame and then 2/3 from the Big East (Rutgers, Syracuse, Pitt- whoever the rumor is this week). The SEC raids the southern members of the ACC (Miami, FSU, Clemson, Ga Tech).

This leaves the Big XII with 4 (KU, KSU, Baylor, Iowa State). Speaking of which, the Cyclones are completely screwed as well, if there's a break up. The ACC is back to 8, the Big East football side is at 5 or 6? That leaves 18 geographically disparate teams vying for... something. And that doesn't include if you throw in some of the oddballs (TCU, BYU, Utah) into the mix or some of the schools that are great at one sport (Gonzaga, Boise St).

Also, would the SEC ever consider kicking out Vandy for a better sports school? How did Vandy get there in the first place and why are they still there? They seem like the nerd that's in the frat or on a sports team just to keep the GPA above water.

SI

Iowa State is so screwed in this. I feel bad for them :(

Oh, and MrBug- that was pretty good and scarily accurate

SI

The Mountain West is a stronger basketball conference than you think. There's some pretty good, consistent NCAA tournament schools in there.

Another Orangebloods.com report is up and it says that the Texas Legislature is pushing for Baylor and not Colorado to be added to the Pac-10 if they want Texas.

They're a founding/charter member of the SEC, all the way back to 1932.

The original 13 were the most western & southern members of the then 23 member Southern Conference which at times between 1894-1928 stretched from Virginia to Texas.

Only three schools have ever left: Sewanee (left 1940), Georgia Tech (in '64), and Tulane (in '66). Here's an interesting article from a couple of years ago about why each of those schools left. Based on what I've heard about GT's departure over the years, the summaries seem pretty accurate IMO.

But to answer your original question, the only way I ever see Vandy not being a part of the SEC is if they decided to leave on their own accord.

Is Vanderbilt really that bad of a sports school? I know they can't really compete in the SEC in football, but their basketball team has been one of the better ones in the conference this decade. I'm pretty sure they were even a #1 seed in the baseball tournament a couple years back.

Plus they are a strong academic school which I think the conference has to like having on their resume.

If you were going to kick out a school, I'd probably look at either of the Mississippi schools. Neither is particularly strong in athletics and both are at the bottom of the conference academically.

I still don't understand the lure of these mega-conferences. I understand 12 teams, but 16 seems way too much. Not only do teams not play each other in football often, but it seems like it would really hurt rivalries in the conferences.

The idea of conferences for me seemed to be getting a bunch of regional schools of similar ability and creating a great atmosphere for sports. These mega-conferences with no history are boring to me. There are people who like Big East basketball, but I find it sort of dumb that you have teams like South Florida, DePaul, etc. in it just so you can fill it out.

It's all about the money - specifically TV money. Speaking of a mega conference, there is chatter that the Pac-10 at least discussed the idea of going to 22 teams by offering the entire Big 12. Instead, it looks like they are just going to offer all of the South division.

Which is how Baylor got in the Big 12.

It doesn't really matter. For purposes of expansion, you don't make these decisions for the short-term, but the long-term. Anyone who would be against expansion because their football team might struggle for the next 2-4 years against increased competition, isn't making decisions based on the right criteria.

That said, I hope Kiffin falls flat on his face. :)

Looks like it will work for the Pac-10 as well.. word out of the meetings this weekend is that the Pac-10 is willing to offer Baylor instead of Colorado.