Skip to content

As the expansion dust clears, what’s next?

Monty Python

So we’ve wasted all of that time, effort and angst — in the midst of a football season, no less — for… that?

After two months worth of daily speculation, rumor and innuendo, the Pac-12 put the kibosh on Expansionpalooza v2.0 very late last night, announcing, in essence, “never mind, we’re good” with their current 12-member makeup.  At least, we think the kibosh has been put on a seismic shift in the conference landscape; with Texas, Oklahoma and the rest of the Big 12 dealing with myriad issues that some feel can be “resolved” by the laughably short-sighted, delaying-the-inevitable notion of a five-year promise of peace, anything is and will continue to be possible.

Wife: You’re not happy, I’m not happy.  May be it’s time to go our separate ways.

Husband: Yeah, maybe you’re right.

Wife, realizing she still wears the only pair of pants in the family: Or, we could stay together for a few more years and see if things change.

Husband, remembering getting shot down by the hot chick at closing time: Yeah, what the hell.  Might as well give it a shot.

Many thought the Pac-12’s decision to eschew expansion at this time would result in some immediate conference clarity.  That’s far from the case for a situation even more fluid than it was just 24 hours ago, and with a plethora of additional questions as an added bonus.  Don’t believe me?  Read on as I attempt to wade through the mass of fact, fiction and most everything else in between.

What’s known…

  • In 2010, Texas’ unwillingness to bend on the issue of The Longhorn Network prevented the then-Pac-10 from expanding to 16 members.  In 2011, Texas’ unwillingness to bend on the issue of The Longhorn Network prevented the Pac-12 from expanding to 16 members.
  • Texas A&M will become the 13th member of the SEC, whether it’s in 2012 or 2013.  With the Big 12 “saved from extinction”, any incentive for Baylor et al to pursue legal means to prevent a move has vanished, meaning the Aggies should be free and clear to officially move to their new conference next summer.
  • In a pair of public statements, the SEC denied two reports regarding Missouri, that the an offer of membership is on the table and that and an informal agreement among presidents is in place to bring the school into the conference.
  • Pittsburgh and Syracuse will become the 13th and 14th members of the ACC, but probably not until the 2014 season as the Big East appears hellbent on abiding by the conference’s bylaws and forcing the two schools to wait the mandated 27 months before departing.  That, of course, could change pending any additions the Big East may make.
  • Following a meeting of the football-playing members Monday night in New York City, the Big East announced that “we are committed as a conference to recruit top-level BcS-caliber institutions with strong athletic and academic histories and traditions.”  Commissioner John Marinatto went on to confirm in the statement that his conference “has been approached by a number of institutions“, although he would not specify which schools.
  • Navy athletic director Chet Gladchuk confirmed publicly that he has spoken to conferences, specifically the Big East, regarding football-only membership.
  • Current Conference USA member East Carolina has applied for membership into the Big East.
  • Mountain West commissioner Craig Thompson has confirmed that his conference and Conference USA have discussed a quasi-merger that would involve only the football programs.
  • The Big Ten has no desire to expand unless there’s a seismic shift in the conference makeup of college football — sorry, ACC; adding Pitt and ‘Cuse doesn’t count — or unless Notre Dame suddenly decides to shed their football independence.
  • Unbelievably, there are football games — college football games — that will be played this weekend.

What’s known to be rumored…

  • Let’s get this out of the way right off the bat: rebuffed by the Pac-12, Oklahoma, and by extension Oklahoma State, will turn their attention to the SEC even as they’re publicly stating they are willing to give the Big 12 another go, provided certain concessions are made.  At least, that’s the rumor.  Dating back to the first round of expansion apocalypse last May/June, it’s long been thought OU has little to no interest in moving to the SEC.  Given the change in circumstances, there’s a chance — a very, very slim chance from this vantage point — that OU could have a change of heart and look Southeast.
  • Missouri either has an offer on the table or the presidents/chancellors in the SEC have given an informal go-ahead for the school to join the conference.  As noted above, the SEC has publicly denied either of those have occurred.  Based on the leaks coming from Columbia, it appears MU either has an interest in the SEC or has — or had depending on their reaction to the Pac-12’s non-move last night — an interest in creating the impression that they had options other than the Big 12.
  • West Virginia has been rebuffed in recent days by both the SEC and ACC (Note to ‘Eers fans: remember the title of this little section).  School officials have vehemently denied that’s the case.  Regardless of the veracity of either rumor — or the semantics involved — the speculation from most observers centers around WVU being what’s described as a second-tier candidate — or fourth or fifth option, if you will — if the SEC ultimately decides to make a move to 14 or even 16 members.
  • Both UConn and Rutgers have inquired about potential membership in the ACC.  The latter school is also rumored to be double-dipping, batting their eyes at the Big Ten as well.  Both schools were represented at the Big East football meeting of the minds Monday night — UConn’s president and athletic director were represented by individuals from their offices — with RU athletic director Tim Pernetti stating that “[e]verybody is committed to going out and recruiting top-level institutions to enhance the future of the league.”  It’s believed both school’s “loyalty” to the Big East is tied directly to the ACC’s willingness to go beyond 14 members.
  • Air Force is one of the double-digit schools that has expressed interest in joining in the Big East, albeit as a football-only member.  Why the Falcons would willingly leave a Mountain West Conference that may or may not become an automatic BcS qualifier for an unstable Big East that may or may not keep their automatic BcS qualifying status is unknown.
  • UCF is considered a second-tier candidate for membership in the Big East.  With a rising football program and significant television market it would bring to the table, it’s unclear why they would be that “far” down the list for a conference that needs to add as many quality names as it can.  UCF would seem to meet the criteria on all of fronts except for one: their proximity to USF.
  • Somewhat below UCF on the Big East’s radar is Villanova and Temple; separately, Memphis has reportedly been dismissed missed as a potential candidate as has East Carolina, which we noted above has already applied for membership.

Questions that remain unanswered…

What concessions are Texas willing to make in order to ensure the viability, at least in the short-term, of the Big 12?
Per reports, Oklahoma’s demands are twofold: one, the removal of Dan Beebe as the conference’s commissioner and, two, a vastly revamped Longhorn Network.  The latter was an issue two years running in keeping UT out of the Pac-12, and it would appear the Austin school is now dealing from a position of strength now that their Red River rival’s West Coast bluff has been called.  Revenue sharing is the path of least resistance to conference stability (see: Big Ten, SEC); anyone who can’t see that is either not the sharpest knife in the chandelier or whose closet is littered with burnt orange clothing.  Will UT be willing to give up some of the power and money they’ve been allowed to grab in order to keep the Big 12 a viable conference?  That’s the $300 million question at this point in time.

Serve Beebe’s head on a platter to preserve the Big 12?
Or, more specifically, will Oklahoma back off the condition they leaked to the media Monday, that Beebe must step down as commissioner in order to preserve the conference?  Right or wrong, Beebe is perceived by current and former members of the Big 12 as being nothing but a puppet whose strings can only be pulled by Texas and that school’s whims.  We’re guessing that condition won’t be a significant stumbling block if still required, especially for a Texas school that reportedly didn’t want Beebe as commissioner in the first place.

Who the hell would want to join this Big 12 morass?
“We’re going to make this work and we’re going to be stronger coming out on the other end and blah blah blah…”  OK, whatever.  The fact remains that if Texas acquiesces… if Oklahoma decides it’s enough acquiescence… if Mizzou decides to turn its eyes away from the SEC, the Big 12 will be at nine schools once A&M officially leaves.  The consensus is the conference will have to get back to 10 teams to satisfy provisions of its new television deal, or maybe even maintain the desire to get back to 12; the question is, how will a conference with such bitter infighting and outward instability be able to attract one school let alone three?  The big incentives the conference has to dangle, of course, are a membership in a conference that would maintain its automatic BcS qualifying status as well as a TV deal that will pay each member in excess of $15 million annually, perhaps even more if UT agrees to equal revenue sharing.  That would certainly be attractive to schools like BYU, Houston and SMU (West Virginia?) if they can get past the instability.  Besides bodies, though, what would any combination of those schools, or any other schools for that matter, add to the Big 12?  At this point, as long as the Big 12 has UT and OU, everything else is merely necessary window dressing anyway.

How long will the SEC remain comfortable with a baker’s dozen?
The public face of the SEC is that they would be fine for the short-term with adding just A&M and sticking with 13 members in 2012.  The reality is a 13-team conference creates a scheduling nightmare, with the very real potential of schools in the seven-team division playing one more conference game than their six-team counterparts.  In a conference as competitive as the SEC, that should be unacceptable.  On the other hand, the SEC doesn’t want to add another school just to fill up a slot; it needs to be a fit that strengthens the long-term future of the league.  Such a scenario points directly at current members of the ACC and their newly-implemented $20 million exit fee being in play if the SEC decides to expand.  It’s become quite the conundrum for the SEC, thanks in large part to the events out west last night, although it’s nothing someone like commissioner Mike Slive can’t comfortably and successfully navigate.

Will the ACC stand pat?
Somewhat shockingly, the ACC over the weekend became the first BcS conference to go above 12 members, poaching the Big East (again) to get to 14 members.  Both UConn and Rutgers appear ready, willing and able to accept an invitation to the ACC; it remains a complete unknown whether that conference wants to be the first to create a “superconference” or, now that the Big 12 has been hauled out of the abyss (maybe) and the Pac-12 will seemingly remain at 12,  is comfortable with where they are membership-wise.

Will TCU honor its commitment and move to the Big East?
You have to somewhat feel for TCU.  In 2010, the school announced they were moving from the Mountain West to the Big East, with their eyes firmly affixed on the possible automatic bid attached to membership.  A year later, the conference they will call home beginning in 2012 is in utter disarray thanks to a second round of poaching by the ACC.  The Horned Frogs would appear to have two viable options: follow through and join the Big East or remain in the MWC, which would welcome the school back with open arms.  An expanded Big 12 might also be a possibility, although the Texas schools are said to not want to add any new members from their recruiting footprint.

Is the Pac-12 really done expanding?
This is one to keep an eye on, in tandem with the Big 12’s ability to compromise.  One of the current schools of thought is that the Pac-12’s decision to forego expansion this time around was merely a ploy to force Texas to come off their LHN stance and embrace equal revenue sharing on all levels.  By all appearances, and armed with a mega-TV deal that will go into effect next year, Larry Scott and his bosses appear perfectly comfortable standing pat at 12 members.  If UT decides it would be better to fold their network into the Pac-12’s regional model and share revenue equally instead of making the Big 12 work?  Hello Expansionpalooza v3.0.

Halle-freaking-lujah…

Permalink 14 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Air Force Falcons, American Athletic Conference, Atlantic Coast Conference, Big 12 Conference, BYU Cougars, Conference USA, East Carolina Pirates, Houston Cougars, Independents, Missouri Tigers, Mountain West Conference, Navy Midshipmen, Oklahoma Sooners, Oklahoma State Cowboys, Pac-12 Conference, Pittsburgh Panthers, Rumor Mill, Rutgers Scarlet Knights, SMU Mustangs, Southeastern Conference, Syracuse Orange, TCU Horned Frogs, Texas A&M Aggies, Texas Longhorns, Texas Tech Red Raiders, Top Posts, UCF Golden Knights, UConn Huskies
14 Responses to “As the expansion dust clears, what’s next?”
  1. southernpatriots says: Sep 21, 2011 2:22 PM

    When the dust clears, we can all breathe more easily. When the dust clears, the fans and traditional rivalries will likely be slighted. When the dust clears, all will have a better idea of what was fueling all the chaos in the first place–MONEY. But, there is no way to go back. No way to preserve the way which is familiar to us.

    The present and future will be around the sponsors, boosters, tv monies and other incomes for the universities because they will not turn down the money from tv and from sponsors. They need money to help with declining funds from states and even from philanthropists. This new reality will be our normal reality.

    We will yearn for the times of yesteryear as we always do, but they will be no more. POD conferences, superconferences, billions of dollars coming from tv revenues and sponsors. Higher pay for coaches and staffs, larger and more luxurious standiums and luxury boxes. Yesterday will be no more, tomorow will bring better things? Maybe we will at least be able to breath better…the dust will have cleared.

  2. phelbin says: Sep 21, 2011 2:48 PM

    Southernpatriots, I have a very different viewpoint as a Pac12 fan. Ours schools not named USC have typically had very little to work with financially. These new deals will allow us to pay competitive coaching staff salaries and upgrade our stadiums/training facilities. In other words, this new money helps us to get more competitive with the SEC and B1G.

    For us, reminiscing about the past includes feelings of inadequacy and constantly being underestimated. Our so-called glory years aren’t behind us. So I welcome the changes.

    And although I was looking forward to adding the Oklahoma schools, I really like that the Pac12 was the one doing the rejecting. Coming from a position of strength is new for us.

  3. WingT says: Sep 21, 2011 2:55 PM

    I don’t hear the fat lady singing. This is far from over.

    Nice recap JT – I bet you and Benker Cheval have been a bit busy lately, lol.

    Also, please try and find some time to squeeze in a story or two in regards to the ole ball coach and Hotel Columbia

  4. Deb says: Sep 21, 2011 3:25 PM

    Hey, JT, can you say all that again? ;)

  5. artbyshan says: Sep 21, 2011 3:42 PM

    It’s not over (Realignment) , I just think it’s slowed down. I don’t think the SEC will stay w/ 13, and there are too many teams (Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St.) that are tired of Texas.

  6. thefiesty1 says: Sep 21, 2011 4:19 PM

    DeLOSS —are you listening AND paying attention? Was your LHN really worth ALL of this?

  7. mhalt99 says: Sep 21, 2011 4:49 PM

    My question is: At what point do conferences start looking inward and deciding who stays and who goes. Say Texas and OU want to go to the SEC with an equal rev share deal but need to bring a couple teams….at what point do you say thank you for your academics and basketball, but Vanderbilt you have to go.

    How much more profitable does football have to become over basketball before the ACC decides it would like to bid adieu to a UNC/Duke/Wake

    Not trying to ruffle feathers of individual schools/alums….in this day and age of the almighty dollar though, at what point do universities stop pretending to care about anything but revenue maximization?

  8. artisan3m says: Sep 21, 2011 4:53 PM

    The lesson learned here should be how close Baylor came to being an orphaned stepchild. If the Baptists have any sense at all, they will look for another port for this storm is far from over. Its the right time ~ Baylor has a very good team this year with a Heisman candidate at quarterback. It should shop its worth while the stars are aligned as this same scenario will definitely come to a boil again next year ~ ~ perhaps before. Baylor might have some marketability during the storm’s lull, but in desperation mode, hardly any at all. She cannot rely on Texas OR Oklahoma staying in the Big-12 fold and after spearheading the move to block A&M’s departure to the SEC, she many not have as many conference friends as thought.

  9. artisan3m says: Sep 21, 2011 4:56 PM

    Self-edit ~ that should read “may not have as many friends as thought.”

  10. Deb says: Sep 21, 2011 5:13 PM

    @artisan3m …

    Please stop referring to Baylor in the feminine. Statistically speaking, most spurned lovers who try to hold an ex hostage at gunpoint while threatening everyone else in sight are male. As for Baylor finding another conference to court, I’ll paraphrase an old Gunsmoke episode: After the way they’ve behaved, I wouldn’t take them if they were tossed into the pot on a poker bet.

  11. mdnittlion says: Sep 21, 2011 5:32 PM

    @ mhalt99

    Actually UNC football was tied this past year with USC at 9 players for most draft picks from one school. The scouts at the NFL combine clearly stated if all the guys that were suspened would have played last year, UNC would have got to the National Championship easy. UNC had the best turn out at the combine from a single school in over 6 yrs. But now that Blake & Davis are gone the talent level is going to really drop off. And I am in no way a UNC alum at all, just stating the facts

  12. paulbrownsrevenge says: Sep 21, 2011 10:31 PM

    @southernpats

    Nice post, damn near brought a tear to my eye. I love tradition. I guess I’m getting old now.

  13. mogogo1 says: Sep 22, 2011 12:31 AM

    mhalt99 says:

    My question is: At what point do conferences start looking inward and deciding who stays and who goes.
    _________________

    A great and very logical question. It’s bound to eventually happen. (Probably has already has been discussed in private.) Every conference has weak sister schools that really don’t belong from a competitive standpoint. If some network comes calling, offering many millions more if Texas takes the place of WeakSisterU, are any o these money-hungry schools going to say no?

    The big surprise so far to me has been the Pac-12 saying they’re not going to expand further. Creating West and East divisions would allow most of the original Pac-10 teams to have their cake and eat it, too. They’d keep all their traditional rivalries and only have to periodically play the new teams. For a conference that was wanting to go to 16 teams just last year, an alignment like that just makes too much sense to not eventually happen. My guess is they’re looking for a solution to the problem of the Longhorn Network.

    I think it’s unlikely anybody other than the Big 12 will be willing to let Texas keep LHN, even if they’d agree to share money equally, because it’s just too big an advantage in terms of publicity and recruiting. Is the Pac-12 playing hardball right now, waiting for Texas to discover that and realize they’d still make more in the Pac-12 than anywhere else?

  14. critter69 says: Sep 22, 2011 5:20 AM

    So with Pitt and Syracuse going to the ACC, where are all those who stated in no uncertain terms that Pitt and Syracuse would end up in the Big 10?

    The Big 10 does NOT look at football only. It looks at academics FIRST, then research, with the entire athlitic program coming in at best third. Guess why Mizzou and WVU aren’t in the Big 10, even though they’ve tried and tried to get in?

    Oh, and UT? Could it act as an equal, or would it try the ‘first among equals’ stunt again? I don’t think the Big 10 would want to see if UT could change it’s stripes on that issue.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!