(07-28-2013 11:43 AM)brista21 Wrote: Cincinnati and East Carolina. Getting into Florida is nice for the Big 12, but Cincinnati more than anyone outside a "power conference" (and even compared to many in them) deserves a spot at the table. East Carolina while not quite as successful on the field as Cincy's been the last several years has the fanbase of a major program and all the potential in the world to go from their current good program to great or even elite. Those also give you a nice trio of schools in the Eastern Time Zone when combined with WVU.
If they were to go to 14 like the Big Ten, ACC and SEC then adding UCF and USF are no brainers.
The problem with all of this is that if the Big 12 catches up with the Big 10, SEC, and ACC with the number of teams they are too late to the game to do it with the caliber of additions that would put them on par with the total strength of the other 3 conferences when all things are considered: academics, profitability of all members, attendance, travel attendance, stadium sizes, and most importantly making up the difference in market disparity. The rock and the hard place now exists between those who claim that the Big 12 is stronger in many regards with 10 (and they are) and those who claim they will always be a target unless they grow (and they will be). They are still positioned in the smallest footprint and between three conferences who have already raided them so growing is a must for stability. But, if they can't grow with additions that make more for everyone they would be foolish to do so. So stalemate exists on the growth issue for the Big 12.
I don't know if it will happen but Cincinnati, B.Y.U., Connecticut, and others definitely deserve a spot in the upper tier. But the only way to accomplish that with some kind of balance is for them to each find their own way into 18 member conferences. Why? Because to accommodate 72 schools, and do it with balance, conferences of 3 six team divisions will need to come into play.
Part of the objective of the networks is to see some semblance of balance between the 4 regions. While that does not have to necessitate the same number of teams per conference it definitely needs to have some balance in earning potential (which helps with equal access to talent) and in crowd draw and to some extent in facilities to make the games as appealing as possible to television. If you added any of the four teams mentioned to the Big 12 inequity would exist between the Big 12 and SEC, PAC, and Big 10 to such an extent that balance would not be able to be maintained. Actually, they do have a great degree of balance with 10 schools in earnings for now. But the issue there is "for now".
Schools like Cincinnati, Connecticut, B.Y.U., East Carolina, South Florida, Southern Methodist, Houston, and perhaps Rice or Tulane could be valuable to the remaining conferences for their academics, relationships to AAU, or simply for an entry into an untapped television market. Some of those schools are valuable because they compete well. But none of them will get consideration unless we have a movement toward a negotiated balancing of markets and earnings potential between conferences. Not all inequities will be dealt with. The SEC will still exist in the most talent rich area of the country and that can't be changed. The Big 10 will likely still have the best research assistance in the CIC, and the PAC simply owns the West geographically (both an attribute that has kept them from being raided and an obstacle to their growth). The ACC could easily grow into an equal rival of both the SEC and Big 10 should they ever attract the kinds of additions that would draw national eyeballs. Should there be a move to 4 conferences the likelihood of being able to place 8 more schools profitably (and therefore move to 72 by including almost all of the schools talked about as expansion candidates in this thread) becomes much more doable than simply adding 4 of them to the Big 12.
/
Big 12 Expansion Candidates
