interesting take on what almost was

http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/college/f...YQJpeeT4cN

That was definitely what the Big East was going to try, but my guess at the time was that it would still have been easier to do the other way around provided the remaining Big 12 schools had the votes to avoid the league dissolving. That would have depended on conference by-laws (if they were similar to the Big East; it's quite possible dissolving would have been impossible).

The reasons for that were:
1. (By far the biggest): The Big 12 would have had an absolute mountain of exit money coming in. You were talking 8, possibly 9 members leaving in a conference where the official buy-out was supposed to be about $20 million each. Realistically it would have been a lot lower than that, but the remaining schools were not going to by pass that money even if it meant helping other schools with their own buy-outs.
2. The Big 12 name was the bigger name in football.
3. The basketball league would have been great, but probably too big. At that point, the Big 12 schools inviting most/all the Big East football schools would have kept the size more manageable.
4. The bowls (only very recently signed) still had a number of years to go and the Big 12 bowls were a lot better than the Big East ones.

Either way it went down, it would have essentially been a merger (leaving out Baylor in one senario and possibly one or two Big East schools in the the other). I think it would have just been a bit easier to do with the legal framework of the Big 12.

I don't think Kansas would have been left on the table.

(06-13-2013 11:20 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  I don't think Kansas would have been left on the table.

Agreed. That's a 2011 article, and this never would have happened then because UT already had LHN, but... if UT and OU are already gone and KU is still available, then either the Big Ten or Pac-12 would add KU. The Pac would have the edge because they might be willing to take in KSU (for an 18-team league) along with KU, whereas the Big Ten would not make room for KSU.

It's also likely that the SEC's search for a 14th member to enter with TAMU would have led to the same result as their actual search, so Mizzou would also have been unavailable to the Big East.

Well the Big East had added TCU already, so it would have likely been Kansas, Kansas State, and Iowa State.

They were trying to work around the LHN to fit in the PAC, and trust me, if the PAC 12 had taken the Texahoma Four... the Big East was ready to pull the trigger (already had deals in place, just in case) and the basketball schools would have loved Kansas. The Big East expansion committee failed to accomplish ANYTHING else because they were so fixated on responding to that from July to September, so within days of that article when Texas said they were going nowhere, the Big East had nothing else agreed too and they became the raided conference, as 'Cuse and Pitt jumped to the ACC soon after!

I think the Big 12 would have simply invited all of the Big East's football schools simply because they would have had all the bowls, exit fees, etc.

Big 12 West - Baylor, TCU, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, South Florida
Big 12 East - Connecticut, Rutgers, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Louisville

If the Big 12 doesn't sign a grant of rights shortly thereafter, the ACC ad Big Ten still make their moves. If they do, the Big Ten is still at 12 and the ACC is still at 12 with Maryland instead of Louisville.

If the Big 12 is forced to reload:

Big 12 West - TCU, Baylor, Houston, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State
Big 12 East - Cincinnati, Connecticut, South Florida, Central Florida, West Virginia, ???

The last slot goes to one of East Carolina, UMass, Temple, Memphis, Navy, etc. But if the Pac 12 has already gone to 16, it may trigger the dreaded 4 x 16 alignment, with the Big 12 losing 5 to 6 more schools (ACC goes 16/16 with Connecticut as a full member and Navy as football only, or 16/17 with Cincinnati and Connecticut as full members).

(06-14-2013 12:02 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(06-13-2013 11:20 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  I don't think Kansas would have been left on the table.

Agreed. That's a 2011 article, and this never would have happened then because UT already had LHN, but... if UT and OU are already gone and KU is still available, then either the Big Ten or Pac-12 would add KU. The Pac would have the edge because they might be willing to take in KSU (for an 18-team league) along with KU, whereas the Big Ten would not make room for KSU.

It's also likely that the SEC's search for a 14th member to enter with TAMU would have led to the same result as their actual search, so Mizzou would also have been unavailable to the Big East.

Pac 12 would have stopped at 16. KU would have to find an eastern home. If MU goes to SEC in that scenario, the Big 10 probably moves up its schedule and takes Maryland as suggested in the article and then either Rutgers or Kansas. ACC adds Pitt, SU and one other (WVU, UL, UConn, KU?). Big East is stronger than now, but still shredded. They get TCU, Baylor, KSU, ISU to add to Cincinnati, USF and most likely UConn, Rutgers, UL and the 8 basketball schools.

If there's one thing that we've learned in conference realignment, s**t ALWAYS rolls downhill. Except for maybe Boise State and SDSU reneging on going to the Big East to stay in the MWC, there hasn't been any situation where a conference that was lower on the food chain has been able to do a "reverse raid" on someone perceived to be stronger. The WAC thought that they were going to be able to do that with the MWC when Utah left for the Pac-12 and BYU went independent, but they were literally then killed off as a FBS league. The Big East had dreams of doing this with the leftover Big 12 schools, but the reality was that it was much more likely that the Big 12 leftovers would have invited who they wanted from the Big East to form a new league. Heck, look at even the "leftovers" from the the Big East itself - they were down to 3 football schools and still ended up raiding C-USA as opposed to the inverse occurring. Whenever a conference thinks that it can jump another league in the pecking order, that's usually exactly when it gets smacked back to the stone age.

(06-13-2013 11:20 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  I don't think Kansas would have been left on the table.

KU is an AAU state flagship school with an elite basketball brand - but it's also got just one BCS bowl appearance and is from a low population state. I think there was a very real danger that we'd have been left out of the power conferences if it had all really hit the fan.

(06-14-2013 09:03 AM)BewareThePhog Wrote:  

(06-13-2013 11:20 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  I don't think Kansas would have been left on the table.

KU is an AAU state flagship school with an elite basketball brand - but it's also got just one BCS bowl appearance and is from a low population state. I think there was a very real danger that we'd have been left out of the power conferences if it had all really hit the fan.

You would have had a home in the SEC if it came to that as long as you were willing to split with Kansas State. On the SEC board, we throw around wish lists, and KU is always in the top 5. In loose order, it is typically UNC, OU, UVA, KU, WVU. Fans also want FSU, Clemson, and Ga. Tech, but we understand that ship has sailed due to TV contracts.

I think the B1G would have scooped up MU and KU as a package.

You get 2 AAU schools, KC and SL markets, a great rivalry, one big population state and one basketball royalty program.

It also works geographically:

-KU
-MU
-NU
-MN
-WI
-UIA
-UIL

-NW
-PU
-IU
-MSU
-UM
-PSU
-OSU

Who raids who is a question of timing in this case.

(06-14-2013 01:59 AM)IceJus10 Wrote:  Well the Big East had added TCU already, so it would have likely been Kansas, Kansas State, and Iowa State.

They were trying to work around the LHN to fit in the PAC, and trust me, if the PAC 12 had taken the Texahoma Four... the Big East was ready to pull the trigger (already had deals in place, just in case) and the basketball schools would have loved Kansas. The Big East expansion committee failed to accomplish ANYTHING else because they were so fixated on responding to that from July to September, so within days of that article when Texas said they were going nowhere, the Big East had nothing else agreed too and they became the raided conference, as 'Cuse and Pitt jumped to the ACC soon after!

In 2010, when the PAC 12 commish was flying all over the midwest trying to land UT, OU and several others... I think at least four, maybe five schools had a standing invite to the BE. Missouri, Kansas, K state, and Iowa State. That would have probably made the BE a great and stable conference at the time. If you think about it the LHN has saved the Big XII twice. Yeah!

(06-14-2013 12:11 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(06-14-2013 01:59 AM)IceJus10 Wrote:  Well the Big East had added TCU already, so it would have likely been Kansas, Kansas State, and Iowa State.

They were trying to work around the LHN to fit in the PAC, and trust me, if the PAC 12 had taken the Texahoma Four... the Big East was ready to pull the trigger (already had deals in place, just in case) and the basketball schools would have loved Kansas. The Big East expansion committee failed to accomplish ANYTHING else because they were so fixated on responding to that from July to September, so within days of that article when Texas said they were going nowhere, the Big East had nothing else agreed too and they became the raided conference, as 'Cuse and Pitt jumped to the ACC soon after!

In 2010, when the PAC 12 commish was flying all over the midwest trying to land UT, OU and several others... I think at least four, maybe five schools had a standing invite to the BE. Missouri, Kansas, K state, and Iowa State. That would have probably made the BE a great and stable conference at the time. If you think about it the LHN has saved the Big XII twice. Yeah!

The article says those 4 had an agreement in principle in 2010 to join the BE.