A friend of mine in Texas is an Economic strategist....This is how he sees things (realignment) shaking out according to the numbers:
So, the last major consolidation happened in the mid 90's. Here we are again, at a day that surely had to happen. If you look at the landscape of major conferences today, its still a complete clusterfornication. Providence and Seton Hall in "major" conferences? Seriously? 6 conferences instead of 4 or 8? There was bound to be a breaking point and of course it all comes down to $,$$$,$$$,$$$. TV contracts keep getting bigger, BCS tension keeps growing and there's a whole slew of sports television conference contract renegotation is seemingly all taking place in a fairly narrow window. Two things matter: football (marketshare, tv contracts, etc.) and endowments. It's where the big money is, comes from and ultimately determines a university's fate, at least from an athletic standpoint. I couldn't think how best to boil this all down, so I arranged by conference with comments, in no particular order:
PAC-10: the bottom 6-10 in endowments range from $407-$678 million, so Colorado at $593 fits nicely. The top 1-5 endowments range from $2,600-12,600 million, so Texas and Texas A&M fit nicely. Texas expressed interest in joining the PAC-10 when the SWAC was falling apart, but reluctantly (they publicly admitted it was reluctant to do so) joined its fellow SWAC schools in forming the new Big 12. The PAC-10 has been in current form since 1978, second only to the Ivy League in tenure. Planning to launch own TV network. Beebe would like it to be a joint effort with the Big 12, but to me that's the fait accompli of the Big 12. The PAC 10 really just wants Texas and Texas A&M. When negotations begin, any TV network is going to tell the PAC 10 its more valuable buying away Texas/Texas A&M than forming a JV w/ the current Big 12. (a la the SWAC/Big 8 tv contract attempt that was the ultimate demise of the SWAC). Love it or hate it, Texas/Texas A&M are beasts (their combined endowments/revenues are billions upon billions larger than the remaining big 12 schools combined).
Big East: Attainted its present 16 team status in 2005. Really a weird amalgamation of 8 private schools with no football and 8 public schools with football programs. The Big East was never going to stand the test of time no matter what happens. Not much else to say here. It will be a straightforward split.
ACC: Attained its present day form in 2005 as well. A conference that can easily be split up if the SEC grabs Miami and Florida State. The others would quickly join with the Big East remains to make a superconference. The combination would be relatively clean cut. I'm sure they'd name their new conference something like "the east coast conference loved by the new york media"
SEC: Got to its present state in 1991. No need to discuss dominance/tv contract power/football fervor here. They'd love to grab UT/TA&M, but Texas really doesn't fit here. Texas has over a $12B endowment; UF has barely a $1B (vandy is actually highest at $2.8B, UF is 2nd); Texas has constantly complained of low academic standards w/in current conference (and they are compared to UT's); the SEC is pretty much a dixie free-for-all. I see the SEC grabbing FSU, Miami, OU and OSU as better fits. OSU would be in the middle third of the expanded conference so they wouldn't be lost in the shuffle by any means.
Big 11: Despised, yet more powerful and well run than any other conference. They don't have a single school with an endowment under $1B, they have high academic standards, they dominate the tv markets they compete in, they are financially in great shape, they have their own tv station contract and they have a commissioner in James Delaney who's (love him or hate him) a force to be reckoned with. He formulated the BCS, he negotiated a crazy impressive tv deal and his teams compete in markets that represent 25% of US households; and he knows it. He'd love to expand to grab a couple big east teams to get into philly and new york, head down and grab missouri to get st. louis and half of KC and to even things out bring in Nebraska. I admire his first-strike mentality. I wish Beebe had it. He's been there since 1989, used to work in the NCAA enforcement office (think that helps) and is just plain gutsy. I can't stand the big 11, but I can't rationally hate what they're out to do. I wish Beebe was this ballsy.
Big 12: Ahh yes, the big 12. Born of greatness; run by incompetence. First, I know everyone and their doppelganger hates UT (other than UT fans), but they and A&M are really screwed by their membership in the big 12. The endowments of big 12 schools (audited 2009 results accounting for liabilities, so different but more accurate than what's reported on each schools website):
1. UT $12,163M
2. TAM $5,083M
3. Nebraksa $964M
4. ku $955M
5. Missouri $881M
6. Baylor $880M
7. Oklahoma $847M
8. Texas Tech $679M
9. Colorado $593M
10. OSU $454M
11. Iowa State $452M
12. KSU $259M
Toss in the rigorous academic requirements of UT and TAM compared to other big 12 schools, the fact that UT has had to launch its own on-demand network, the utter incompetence of dan beebe and you wonder why UT/TAM would stay? Indiana University brought home twice as much revenue as UT from conferencewide football revenue. Twice as much for Indiana; that's sad. If you were the President or AD of UT or TAM you would actually have a fiduciary responsibility to try to seek out a better deal somewhere. And if one's arguments is 'fine, let UT/TAM negotiate on its own separately', then how can other AD's justify remaining in with them? They'd essentially have a huge $ advantage.
A few disclaimers: basketball rivalries mean diddly when talking $$. Rivalry games can always be continued despite being in the different conferences and all the money in basketball comes from March madness, which is about to expand to 96 and thus really doesn't care what the makeup of conferences are. All that matters is football, endowments, TV contracts and keeping a tight hold on the BCS structure (guaranteeing $ for top dogs). Toss any notions of "they won't join a more difficult conference" out the door. Indiana's football program brought in twice as much $$ as UT's last year because of conference contracts. You think their AD or President care? Here's what I could easily see happen:
ACC/Big East supercon 1: I see the Big East leftovers remaining from a big 11 raid joining the rest of the ACC leftovers from an SEC raid (which I think takes Florida State and Miami; the fans of which will care little to be in same conf as Florida and the SEC). The Big East loses 3 to the Big 11; the ACC loses 2 to the SEC. The remaining five Big East football schools slough off the 8 private, non-football schools and combines with the 10 remaining ACC schools to get to 15. They'll need one more to get to 16. If Notre Dame finally capitulates to the Big 11, they're there. If not, not sure who they'll go after. Seems relatively straightforward.
SEC supercon 2: Current SEC plus OU/OSU plus FSU/Miami. I don't see why OU/OSU or FSU/Miami wouldn't take this offer in a heartbeat. Again, UT's decision is the wildcard here. This seems fairly straightforward.
Big 16 supercon 3: Big 11 plus Missouri, Nebraska and 3 Big East schools that get them into key markets (NY, Philly). The Big 16's endowments range from $1,000M to $7,100M, so this is a step up for Mizzou and Nebraska, but they'd get to $1,000M quick. Again, surprisingly straightforward. ku has a larger endowment than missouri, but missouri gets half of KC plus st. louis.
PAC 16 supercon 4: Pac 10 plus Utah (513), Colorado (593), BYU (868) and they really, really hope UT/TA&M. If not, do they go after tcu/SMU, each with ~billion endowments and DFW marketshare, even if it is minor? I'm not sure. Wild-card. Not as straightforward by far among the four.
Conference USA, MAC, Mountain West, Western Athletic Conference, and Big 12 leftovers remain. Unfortunately it looks like TT, Baylor, ku, KSU and Iowa State are left to fend for themselves. Perhaps grab SMU, Tulane, Houston, Rice, UTEP and Tulsa (the western division of conference USA) and one other school like Memphis to reform the Big 12? Or just join Conference USA and have another 16 team conference. It wouldn't be a terrible conference, but not a superconference and unfortunately I think the seat at the football championship table is going to be completely sealed off because...
Once there are four superconferences, I imagine the four commissioners get together with tv folks to formulate a way to keep the theory of the BCS (keep the big bowl $ with the big conferences) and stifle arguments about playoffs by forming some sort of four or 8 team playoff. Perhaps the conference championships become 'round 1' and then there's the final four. Considering the four superconferences represent 64 universities and 95+% tv marketshare across the country, I don't see what would stop them from doing this. Commentators will quickly drop criticizing the bcs under this arrangement as they'd all get a big payday and there would be a 'playoff'. Just like that they soak up all the $ and shut the door on the peasant class universities. All in a day's work...
Unfortunately it leaves out Texas Tech (not much market share in any Texas city but lubbock), Baylor (although potentially an 'even outter' if a conference has 15, Iowa State (they've got nothing to bring to the table anywhere), ku (mizzou accomplishes what you're looking for in a ku in terms of market share), and good ole KSU. I really wish Tim Weiser would throw a coup and get all ballsy and go after four schools to get to 16. Renegotiate tv contracts as a new entity to make UT/TAM feel all warm and fuzzy. Increasing academic standards if they agree to stay as well. Unfortunately, I don't see any of this happening. At today's meeting, Beebe issued an ultimatum to all the Big 12 schools to let him know by next April whether they were committed to the Big 12. Yeah, way to go genius; that'll hold the conference together. Talk radio here is already talking about the 'former' big 12 as though today's ultimatum was nothing more than the timeline for the conclusion of the current big 12. All in all, it sucks royally for KSU, but I guess we've been playing up ever since joining the big 12. Yes, I know we've competed well and even won a conference championship, but this realignment isn't going to happen based on past performance; it's going to be based on future potential revenues and that's a game we simply can't win. One thing is for certain: when Mizzou bolts and ku and KSU are alone together in some conference, ku and KSU will finally be true rivals in every sense of the word.
I tossed in $$$$ signs everywhere because I know how easy it is for typical sports fan to view this from an emotional angle, but this realignment will not be made to satisfy any sort of emotional ties; it's going to be $, plain and simple. It's going to be cold, calculated and make a lot of various parties very rich.
I think the best path for the Big 12 is to go on the offensive, but that's not going to happen. I'm not sure it happens by next April, but the fate of the current big 12 at some point in the next decade is sealed IMO.
