While the WAC is falling, Texas on the rise

      10 Comments on While the WAC is falling, Texas on the rise

Two interesting stories this week that could be the tremors indicating further tectonic shifts in the world of college football.

First, a report from Jon Wilner of the San Jose Mercury News, that WAC members San Jose State and Utah State are potential targets for further Mountain West expansion (presumeably aiming for a 12 team league and the coveted conference championship game option).

Losing one or both of those teams would be a devastating blow to the allready beleagured WAC. A recent change in NCAA rules eliminating the continuity clause, and thus assuring the WAC’s continued gaurenteed berths in the NCAA tournaments, was cause for celebration by embattled WAC commish Karl Benson, but his league is allready stretched for teams. Right now the 2012 season will include just 8 teams, San Jose State, Utah State, New Mexico, Idaho, Texas State, UT San Antonio, Louisianna Tech, and Denver (basketball only). Without the first two the viability of the league falls into serious doubt as 6 teams is below the threshold needed for tournament berths, and just 5 in football would be a scheduling nightmare.

What are the options for poor Karl and the WAC misfits?
First, they could search for additional teams to join, although they were barely able to do that by pulling in UTSA and Texas State this round. Montana has allready turned them down, and Cal Poly and UC Davis recently agreed to join the Big Sky, not something they would have done if they were seriously interested in the WAC. Who is left? Western Sun Belt or C-USA teams, but why leave for a half-dead conference when they are stable where they are now?
Second, they could just wholesale merge with the Sun Belt, forming a 17 team super conference (16 for football) and split into an east and west division. That seems like the most viable option, but depends on whether the Sun Belt is even interested.
Third, some of them, such as Idaho might end up dropping back to D-1AA or joining the Sun Belt/C-USA piecemeal.

Of course the two schools may decide to stay or not even get invites from the Mountain West.

Regardless of what happens in the WAC/MWC, news out of Texas could foreshadow a seismic shift that could render all the above moot anyway by leading to bigger changes. In a deal announced today with ESPN, Texas will launch a 24 hour Longhorns network this fall. ESPN, which will help setup, launch and operate the network will pay the school $300 million over the next 20 years. Thats a lot of money.

Despite statements by Texas President William Powers that the Longhorns are “firmly commited” to the Big 12, its not hard to imagine that with a deal like that in place that the Longhorns could follow BYU’s recent example and opt for independence. Such a move would likely signal the end of the Big 12 as it stands. Without the Longhorns providing the glue to hold the league together teams would probably be picked off by the other leagues, especially the Pac-12 as it looks to move up to 16 teams. If I had to make a guess I’d say things fall out as follows:

To Pac-12: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, Baylor
To SEC: Texas A&M
To Big East: Kansas, Kansas State
To Big Ten: Missourri
To MWC/C-USA/Sun Belt: Iowa State

On the other hand, the Big 12 teams could try and stick together, pulling in a 12th member such as BYU or TCU to fill out back to 10 (or both plus one more for 12), but I think thats less likely to happen.

Looks like it’ll be awhile yet before the conferences settle into a stable period.

10 thoughts on “While the WAC is falling, Texas on the rise

  1. Matt Wiser

    I can’t see the Pac12 taking Baylor and Texas Tech without also gaining Texas. And the big overarching question is: What kind of interference would the Texas State Legislature throw out? They are the ones who essentially forced the Big 8 to take Baylor instead of TCU after the collapse of the SWC.

  2. David K. Post author

    @Matt – It’s definitely not as ig a gain without Texas, but what would their other options be? It’s still a big media market and access to recruiting. And unlike the past president, Larry Scott isn’t going to sit around doing nothing while the rest of the conferences do.

  3. David K. Post author

    We can assume that at some point the Pac-12 wants to get to 16 (and based on last summer I think its clear they do). Further we can assume that they aren’t going to kick out any of the current schools to get there. That means they need four more schools. I don’t think its worth it to go to 14, too much complication, 7 team divisions, etc.

    So what criteria will matter in determining which schools to pick. I’m going with the following (in no particular order)

    1) Academic reputation
    2) Media market
    3) Geographic pairings
    4) Culture

    Potential candidates for expansion are going to be members of the Big 12, MWC, WAC, and possibly Conference USA. Safe to say that the Big Ten and SEC teams aren’t going to be interested and the ACC and Big East teams aren’t close enough to be practical.

    Now I included MWC and WAC, (and C-USA) but I really doubt they would be targeted, if they were acceptable to Larry Scott and the rest of the Pac-12 we could have added any four of them allready.

    That leaves the Big 12. Assuming Texas is unavailable then you have 9 options: Kansas, K-State, Iowa State, Missourri, Texas Tech, Baylor, Ok, Ok State and Texas AM.

    The obvious 4 are the 4 we’ve allready pursued, the Oklahoma schools and Texas Tech and AM. We know there was interest from the first three, and AM might still be interested although they seemed more interested in the SEC. Rather than going after those the Pac-12 could go after the two Kansas schools, but they are not very academically enticing and don’t offer as strong media markets, its also not a region the Pac-12 has ties to, something it does in Texas.

    So back to the four I mentioned, OK, OK State, Tech and AM. If AM goes to the SEC then we need another school to pair with Texas Tech. The only schools that seem to fit are those in Texas: Baylor, UTEP, Houston, Rice, SMU, TCU. Of the six Baylor makes the most sense. It’s allready a BCS school, and despite its religious affiliation which may cause pause among the Bay Area schools in particular, its actually a decent research university and a Tier 1 school in US News and world’s rankings. It would also make it politically easier if we took Baylor as the Texas legislature might have less objections, especially if Texas and AM both want to go their own ways.

    Now its also possible that Scott could make a push for Texas and let them keep their own TV network, but if he’d been willing to do that we’d allready have a Pac-16. Letting the school go its own way on the TV front would damage a Pac-12 network, and might encourage USC/UCLA to do the same.

  4. David K. Post author

    It helps that Tech and Baylor also have something of a rivalry allready, makes them a natural pair.

    And like I said, the divisions are easy, Pac-8 in the West, the rest in the East.

  5. Brendan Loy

    David, of course you’re right that those 4 teams are the most logical if they’re going to expand to 16, but…

    We can assume that at some point the Pac-12 wants to get to 16 (and based on last summer I think its clear they do).

    This is the problem with your analysis: the premise is flawed. What’s clear based on last summer is that the Pac-12 wants to get to 16 if Texas is involved. Last summer provides exactly zero evidence that they want to get to 16 without Texas being involved. You’re entitled to your opinion that they might eventually decide they want to do that, but last summer doesn’t prove your point, and it’s certainly not something that’s “clear” or that “we can assume.” It’s entirely possible, I’d suggest probable, that the only reason the Pac-12 ever wanted to expand to 16 was precisely BECAUSE it meant they could get Texas. If Texas is out of the equation, it’s very, very possible that the Pac-12 will just stay at 12.

    Remember, every new team is a new “mouth to feed” in terms of revenue. Do Okie, Okie State, Tech & Baylor add enough money to the Pac-12’s pot to justify splitting that pot 16 ways instead of 12? Maybe, maybe not; I’m doubtful. Replace any one of those teams with Texas, and the answer becomes “a thousand times yes.” Hell, if Texas wanted to insist that the Pac-12 invite UT-San Antonio, Texas State and Austin Community College in order to get them to come along, that’d still be a better deal financially than adding the four teams you’ve mentioned. 🙂

  6. David K. Post author

    I suppose you have a point there, but I still think the forces at work are still pushing towards 16 team super conferences and the Pac-12 isn’t going to just sit around waiting.

  7. Pingback: Corps, Hidden, Observer, Royal, Story, World, beleagured, england scotland, eyes and ears, hidden gem, hidden gems, royal observer corps, watching the skies, world war ii

  8. Pingback: NUCLEAR WAR 2011

  9. Pingback: Online casino

  10. Pingback: free xbox 360

Comments are closed.