|
|
|
[Ed Note: Gil Haylon finally got tired of scraping rafters and shredding nets all over the NESCAC and has once again agreed to do some blogging for MSP. His first entry looks at the recent conference shifting in college football.]
In looking at the new conference realignments within college football, it seems that the dust has settled and its time to take a look at some of the winners and losers throughout this wild process. There are certainly quite a few schools that made out like bandits (here's looking at you Utah), but there are also some significant questions as well.
The news that seemed to start much of this mess was Nebraska jumping ship to the Big Ten. In many ways Nebraska had no choice but to make this move, as the simple mathematics offered Nebraska far more money on an annual basis in the Big Ten, with the ever-so-profitable Big Ten Network revenue sharing system. Furthermore, Nebraska couldn't risk being left behind if Texas and others bolted for the Pac-16. Still, it is somewhat shocking to look at the Cornhuskers as a Big Ten school, with all of the tradition and history the school has with Texas, Oklahoma, and others. Corn Nation takes a peek into the history of the Big 12 and what Nebraska is leaving behind.
Texas made the other big power play of this whole conference realignment situation, in sticking to its Big 12 roots and holding tight for a ten team Big 12. As Mack Brown noted, this is an important move in keeping Texas football true to Texas, as fans, recruits, and current players will all play football in Texas and its surrounding areas not in a California based conference. The Big 12 came out of this situation weakened by the loss of a traditional power, but not devastated, as losing Colorado is no dent in the Big 12's armor. Still, questions remain as many Texas politicians are now pushing for Houston to be added to the Big 12. Burnt Orange Nation takes an extensive look at the challenges that lie ahead for the new Big 12 and the reasons for staying together.
The Pac-10 conference was really dealt a blow in this whole situation as their aggressive plays to become a power conference ended up failing, though it is hard to argue with the logic behind the moves. In accepting Colorado into the Pac-10, commissioner Larry Scott was forcing the action of Texas and the other possible Pac-16 schools. While the move backfired and left the Pac-10 with a solid but unspectacular Colorado program and an ever-rising Utah program, the moves did little to add to the economic value of the Pac-10 other than add a probable conference championship game. In the end, the Pac-10 had the chance at greatness and ended up with a rather neutral move. Also to be noted is that the Mountain West Conference is hardly damaged by the Utah departure as perennial WAC power Boise State steps right in to fill the void.
Overall, the confusion and the hullabaloo surrounding the conference realignment in college football leaves us with a rather tame chain of events. Sure, the Big Ten has twelve teams, and the Big 12 has 10, but the reality is that the BCS conferences will not be altered all that much in the near future. The Pac-10 (or soon to be Pac-12) and the Big Ten will likely have a conference championship game, and the Big 12 may lose out on one, but there is no 16-team power conference, and the ever-powerful Notre Dame still remains independent. Surely there are questions to be answered and only time will tell whether this was a small shift in the college football scene or a precursor for something much larger.
|
|
|
| User Comments (0) |
|
|
|
| |
Maple Street Press LLC
155 Webster St., Suite B
Hanover, MA 02339
781-347-4730 (phone)
781-347-4732 (fax)
info@maplestreetpress.com
|
|
|
