BCS leagues expanding - yeah?

The Sprint Center in KC is also a new state of the art arena, so you could be reading too much into it.

 

KC was the hub of the old Big Eight. Lawrence is closer to KC than Columbia.

 

​

"Remain calm. All is well!"

-- Jamie Pollard, athletic director, Iowa State University

 

I was thinking something more along the lines of ...

 

There is only one reason why Texas would demand a package deal. It is also the same reason it is highly likely the Texas legislature could legitimately torpedo the Pac-16.

Said reason is the same one that was used to get Tech & Baylor into the Big 12.

That reason is called the Permanent University Fund.

The PUF is a state-run fund that is available only to UT and Texas A&M and it is essentially a bottomless well of money those two schools - and those two schools only - can draw on.

When UT & A&M were about to bolt in the early 90s they were told by state legislators, "go ahead but if you go without Tech and Baylor you will now be sharing the PUF with every university in the state." Miraculously Tech and Baylor wound up in the Big 12.

You can expect the exact same tactic to be used this time around. And I expect it will work.

 

When Pac-10 schools weigh the desired addition of Texas with the potential baggage of Texas Tech, Baylor and Oklahoma State, my guess is they'll grit their teeth and recommend Colorado and Utah. It adds markets No. 21 and 48, solidifies the two western time zones and adds a title game. Not quite the hoped-for splash but maybe the only way the league can get unanimous approval.

 

So if the Pac-16 becomes a reality, and Nebraska and Missouri head to the Big Ten after the Big 12 breaks up, is there any chance the Mountain West becomes a player? They could add the leftover Big 12 schools (Kansas, K-State, Iowa State and ... Colorado? I'm losing track of who's going where), stay more or less within their geographic footprint and become a truly major conference.
Adding those four schools to the football programs they already have would beef up their case for an automatic BCS bid (especially with the Big 12's spot open) and turn a pretty good basketball conference into a great one. And from the standpoint of the Big 12 orphans it's better than being independents, right?

 

Supposedly the MWC is going to offer a spot to Boise on Monday.

 

Adding Boise gets the MWC to 10 schools. Adding KU & K-State gets them to the magic number of 12 and brings in two great hoops programs.

Iowa State is so totally fucked. That really breaks my heart.

 

This whole MWC talk, which is beyond speculation at this point, is interesting. The MWC exists because of a failed attempt at a mega conference. I think one athletic director in the Denver Post story (or somewhere else I read it) on adding Boise said there isn't much interest in going beyond 10, probably because of that failure. But if Kansas and Kansas State became available and were willing, how do you pass that up? You just can't and I doubt they would. Now would they take Iowa State and Baylor, too? Still, all of it seems far fetched, but no one ever thought a week ago six Big 12 schools going to the Pac 10 was exactly realistic and right now it seems at least possible.

 

Roscablo:

Not only did someone think this was possible a week ago, they suggested exactly that per my earlier post.


http://newsok.com/berry-tramel-breaking-up-big-12-hard-but-necessary/article/3464642


"The Pac-10 in some ways is like the Big 12. A little isolated. A little behind in television revenue. A little apprehensive with all the talk going on around the Great Lakes.

A confederation of A&M, Texas, OU, Kansas and two from the group of OSU, Tech, K-State or Colorado (let the politics sort it out; my vote is OSU and Colorado) could join Arizona State and Arizona to form an East Division of the Pac-16, with the eight coastal schools comprising the West Division."