Could be, but, ironically it might not be the Big East, but the long rumored Big 12 split:

http://www.denverpost.com/colleges/ci_4621093

mark kiszla
Divided, Big 12 bound to fall
By Mark Kiszla
Denver Post Staff Columnist


Boulder - A football conference divided cannot stand.

There's a feud in the Big 12 Conference between the North and South. It's a civil war in which nobody wins and Colorado too often loses.

This league - held together by little except greed and a championship game that's regularly as flat as a too-long-open can of Dr Pepper - is a clash of cultures as different as the Birkenstocks in Boulder and the ten-gallon hats of Texas.

In a conference in which the haves and have-nots are divided by geography, what has gone wrong?

"You have Texas, you have Oklahoma and you've got A&M. By and large, other than Nebraska, when you start looking at budgets, facilities, salaries and everything along the way, it's pretty clear-cut where the strength is. I don't think there's any doubt," Colorado coach Dan Hawkins said Tuesday.

"In every league, whether it's high school, college or the pros, you have those scenarios where these are the guys who are the Yankees."

Can't we all get along here?

I'm afraid not.

For a league in which almost half the football teams have trouble putting up a good fight, there's way too much bad blood.

The Big 12 is a conference split by a Red River of tears, as the bullies from the south have won 13 of 16 games this season against the 98-pound weaklings from the northern plains.

Although the Big 12 boasts of three squads ranked among the top 25 (Longhorns, Sooners, Aggies), you again hear barely any noise from the north, other than the wind blowing through towns from Lawrence, Kan., to Ames, Iowa, as the Jayhawks and Cyclones get blown away by real football teams.

If something does not change, the Big 12 will be slowly ripped asunder, and I fear as the imbalance of power grows worse, the league as we know it will not exist 10 years down the road.

A week ago, Oklahoma coach Bob Stoops extended an olive branch and offered the one idea I believe can save this conference from eventual dissolution.

"It would probably be great if you threw out the Big 12 championship game and just crown your (regular-season) champion and play everybody like the Big Ten does, or the Pac-10," Stoops said during a teleconference with reporters. "You could play an extra conference game, get away from the divisions and mix up the teams you are not playing each year."

The proposal by Stoops makes perfect sense.

Which is why it probably has zero chance of becoming reality.

Because Big 12 football stopped making sense a long time ago.

For example: Take the league's championship game.

Please.

Having attended three of the past four productions of this farce, where the higher-ranked team had nothing to gain and everything to lose, fans circled the stadium begging anyone to buy an unwanted ticket and CU lost three times by a combined score of 141-13, I can report with passion and authority that anyone who truly loves college football should hate the Big 12 championship game.

Of course, we all know the lone, solid reason the Big 12 goes to the trouble of shoving a mismatch down the throats of TV viewers.

"It's America, man. It's all about the dollar. The dollar bill," Hawkins said. "When you have that championship game, and that thing generates X amount of dollars for the entire conference, I don't know how you do away with it."

The division between north and south in the Big 12, however, has created problems money cannot fix, too many woes to mention. But here's a partial list of the worst travesties.

A contender with a legitimate shot at the national championship is given the chance to have its dreams shattered by an inferior fellow conference member.

"When you're the higher-ranked team, you don't really have a chance to better yourself, because the conference championship game can only count against you," Hawkins said.

In a mistake bigger than Lucious, Lee Roy and Dewey Selmon, the great, old Thanksgiving rivalry between Nebraska and Oklahoma is now seen less often than those in-laws you try to avoid every holiday season.

Coloradans, who have 1,001 wonderful ways to enjoy an autumn afternoon, are stuck with annual games against Iowa State, Kansas State and Kansas, which is like asking folks to buy tickets to watch wheat grow.

What's wrong with this picture?

The Big 12 needs to get its act together. Work together. Learn to play together.

Or let football teams with too little common ground go their separate ways.

B12 North bites.......

If there is a split, that will be one poor football conference....

The thing is, they strongly considered dumping the Big 12 title game this past offseason and going to the nine conference game season, but it could not be agreed upon at the administrative levels (ADs and those higher in the food chain).

The other thing is that the only right way to split the conference in divisions is a North-South split. There's no easy way to do an East-West split.

The Big 12, in basketball, does not have divisions, but uses tiebreakers for common opponents based on the format of the football divisions.

My guess is that if they could offload Baylor and maybe Colorado, the league could go dump the conference championship and go to the PAC-10 model of scheduling.

mattsarz Wrote:The thing is, they strongly considered dumping the Big 12 title game this past offseason and going to the nine conference game season, but it could not be agreed upon at the administrative levels (ADs and those higher in the food chain).

The other thing is that the only right way to split the conference in divisions is a North-South split. There's no easy way to do an East-West split.

The Big 12, in basketball, does not have divisions, but uses tiebreakers for common opponents based on the format of the football divisions.

My guess is that if they could offload Baylor and maybe Colorado, the league could go dump the conference championship and go to the PAC-10 model of scheduling.

Interesting. Losing Colorado might not be that farfetched if they nudge them towards the Pac-10. I think the Pac-10 has interest in Colorado, though their sordid problems the last few years problem turned a lot of the people in the Pac-10 off. Baylor's problems have also been a thorn in the side of the Big 12. Doesn't seem to be a lot of harmony in that conference.

A B-12 split has the potential to have a enormous impact on several mid-major conferences. C-USA and Sun Belt play within their footprint. The MAC and MWC could be affected as well.

But why would any of the North schools want to leave the Big-12 and lose their BCS ties?

mattsarz Wrote:The thing is, they strongly considered dumping the Big 12 title game this past offseason and going to the nine conference game season, but it could not be agreed upon at the administrative levels (ADs and those higher in the food chain).

The other thing is that the only right way to split the conference in divisions is a North-South split. There's no easy way to do an East-West split.

The Big 12, in basketball, does not have divisions, but uses tiebreakers for common opponents based on the format of the football divisions.

My guess is that if they could offload Baylor and maybe Colorado, the league could go dump the conference championship and go to the PAC-10 model of scheduling.

I suspect that Iowa State and Baylor are the biggest liabilities. Colorado won the B12 North the previous 2 years. Plus Colorado brings bigger TV markets than does Iowa.

a Big 12 split seems pretty far-fetched to me. What could be gained from it? The whole basis of the argument is the disparity between the budgets and competitiveness top teams like Texas with teams like Iowa State, but you have that in EVERY league. What are you going to do, put Texas, A&M, OKlahoma, Nebraska and a couple others in one league and the weaker teams in the other? It makes no sense.

These things come in cycles. This writer for Colorado seems to belittle Kansas State and others in the Big 12 but many of these schools have had more recent success than the Buffs. Missouri was in the Top 20 for much of the season, Iowa State had a shot at the Big 12 championship game in recent years, Kansas State knocked off Texas and has been in the Top 20 regularly over the past decade. Texas, OK, and Nebraska will probably always dominate just like OSU and Michigan usually dominate the Big 10, but other teams do have the capacity to step up from year to year.

So if Iowa State and Baylor are dropped do they look at the MWC, WAC or CUSA to add two members? I would think that maybe Colorado State, New Mexico, Utah, BYU, or even Boise might make a case for being included.

wvucrazed Wrote:a Big 12 split seems pretty far-fetched to me. What could be gained from it? The whole basis of the argument is the disparity between the budgets and competitiveness top teams like Texas with teams like Iowa State, but you have that in EVERY league. What are you going to do, put Texas, A&M, OKlahoma, Nebraska and a couple others in one league and the weaker teams in the other? It makes no sense.

These things come in cycles. This writer for Colorado seems to belittle Kansas State and others in the Big 12 but many of these schools have had more recent success than the Buffs. Missouri was in the Top 20 for much of the season, Iowa State had a shot at the Big 12 championship game in recent years, Kansas State knocked off Texas and has been in the Top 20 regularly over the past decade. Texas, OK, and Nebraska will probably always dominate just like OSU and Michigan usually dominate the Big 10, but other teams do have the capacity to step up from year to year.

Yep. I think the answer the article is really going for is get rid of the championship game. But since that game generates 'x' amount $$$ that isn't likely to happen.

As a result, the teams in the south will continue to be disgruntled until Nebraska and/or Colorado challenge for Top 10-Top 15 status.

Cheers,
Neil

moloch_322 Wrote:So if Iowa State and Baylor are dropped do they look at the MWC, WAC or CUSA to add two members? I would think that maybe Colorado State, New Mexico, Utah, BYU, or even Boise might make a case for being included.

If something crazy like a Big 12 split does happen, my guess is that the MWC will RUN to scoop up Colorado if they're available. Iowa State wold try to bolt to the Big Ten. It's all farfetched, but interesting none the less.

CatsClaw Wrote:Interesting. Losing Colorado might not be that farfetched if they nudge them towards the Pac-10. I think the Pac-10 has interest in Colorado, though their sordid problems the last few years problem turned a lot of the people in the Pac-10 off. Baylor's problems have also been a thorn in the side of the Big 12. Doesn't seem to be a lot of harmony in that conference.

Colorado to the Pac-10 has been considered in the past. But if the B12 can't manage to make a 12-team league work, why would the Pac-10 even bother.

Who knows? Maybe there will be a push for 10-team leagues and the ACC and Big 10 will need to unload a couple of teams? ;-)

Cheers,
Neil

Shannon Panther Wrote:I suspect that Iowa State and Baylor are the biggest liabilities. Colorado won the B12 North the previous 2 years. Plus Colorado brings bigger TV markets than does Iowa.

Colorado is a major problem. While having a bigger TV market, they really don't garner much bigger ratings. Additionally, they are notorious for not travelling to bowl games not named the Fiesta or Holiday Bowl. CU is a bowl game's worst nightmare.


But, it's funny that it is a Denver outlet whining about this. They will have absolutely no say in what happens. The decision makers in the Big 12 are Texas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and to a lesser extent Texas A&M. The rest of the schools will hope to tag along with those 4, some better than others.

If there is a disolution of the Big 12 in the future, it will be in the favor of southern football centric conference much like the old SWC and Colorado would probably be left out in the cold.

omnicarrier Wrote:

CatsClaw Wrote:Interesting. Losing Colorado might not be that farfetched if they nudge them towards the Pac-10. I think the Pac-10 has interest in Colorado, though their sordid problems the last few years problem turned a lot of the people in the Pac-10 off. Baylor's problems have also been a thorn in the side of the Big 12. Doesn't seem to be a lot of harmony in that conference.

Colorado to the Pac-10 has been considered in the past. But if the B12 can't manage to make a 12-team league work, why would the Pac-10 even bother.

Who knows? Maybe there will be a push for 10-team leagues and the ACC and Big 10 will need to unload a couple of teams? ;-)

Cheers,
Neil

Come on, we don't need Northwestern! ;-) Then again, maybe the ACC will dump some of their bad teams like Duke, Florida State and Miami, then we might have interest in them. ;-) ;-) ;-)

Make no mistake about this, Oklahoma, Texas, Nebraska, and A & M are not happy with the current North-South arrangment. And it all comes down to money. Oklahoma, Texas, Nebraska and A & M can make significantly more money by scheduling another home game, as opposed to the money a championship game can provide.

Plus if these schools were to withdraw from the Big 12 and create their own 9/10 team league (Oklahoma, Texas, Nebraska, A & M, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, 2-3 other teams, maybe Arkansas one of them), this new league's TV package would be the same (if not better) as the current 12 team arrangement. Plus Nebraska and Oklahoma could renew their rivalry.

If I were Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, even Colorado and Missouri I would be nervous.

I don't know if the President's would go for this. But Texas, A & M, Oklahoma will do what in their best interest. If past performance predicts future performance, something may well happen here.

WacoBearcat Wrote:Make no mistake about this, Oklahoma, Texas, Nebraska, and A & M are not happy with the current North-South arrangment. And it all comes down to money. Oklahoma, Texas, Nebraska and A & M can make significantly more money by scheduling another home game, as opposed to the money a championship game can provide.

Plus if these schools were to withdraw from the Big 12 and create their own 9/10 team league (Oklahoma, Texas, Nebraska, A & M, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, 2-3 other teams, maybe Arkansas one of them), this new league's TV package would be the same (if not better) as the current 12 team arrangement. Plus Nebraska and Oklahoma could renew their rivalry.

If I were Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, even Colorado and Missouri I would be nervous.

I don't know if the President's would go for this. But Texas, A & M, Oklahoma will do what in their best interest. If past performance predicts future performance, something may well happen here.

Hey, it didn't stop some of those schools like Texas A&M, Texas Tech and Baylor from stabbing TCU and others in the back and bolting to the Big Eight (later the Big 12)!

I can see this split effecting the Big East, Big 10, SEC MWC, WAC and CUSA.

1. Missouri to the Big 10.

2. Big 12 North goes to 9 teams

Nebraska
Kansas
Kansas State
Iowa State
Colorado
Colorado State (MWC)
BYU (MWC)
Utah (MWC)
Boise State (WAC)

3. Big 12 South goes to 10.

Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas Tech
Texas A&M
Texas
Baylor
TCU (MWC)
Arkansas (SEC)
UTEP (CUSA)
Houston (CUSA)

4. SEC adds Louisville

5. Big East adds East Carolina.

6. CUSA looses 3, MWC loses 4 and the WAC looses 1. Will the MWC and the WAC merge? Will CUSAjust stay at 9?

This could really shake up college football.

It will mostly be lopsided because the High Budget teams are in the South as he stated. The best thing they could do is go East-West
East
Iowa St,Kansas,KSt,Missouri, Texas, Texas AM

West
Oklahoma, Nebraska, Colorado, Baylor, Oklahoma St, Texas Tech

Have them like the SEC play ONE Rival from the other side every year.
Oklahoma- Texas
Texas Tech- Texas AM
Nebeaska- Missouri
Colorado= Kansas St
Kansas- Oklahoma st
Iowa St- Baylor

Those in the Northern league might not be happy but know they wont survive without the teams in the South.

There is too much money on the Championship game for them to get rid of it.

WacoBearcat Wrote:Make no mistake about this, Oklahoma, Texas, Nebraska, and A & M are not happy with the current North-South arrangment. And it all comes down to money. Oklahoma, Texas, Nebraska and A & M can make significantly more money by scheduling another home game, as opposed to the money a championship game can provide.

Plus if these schools were to withdraw from the Big 12 and create their own 9/10 team league (Oklahoma, Texas, Nebraska, A & M, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, 2-3 other teams, maybe Arkansas one of them), this new league's TV package would be the same (if not better) as the current 12 team arrangement. Plus Nebraska and Oklahoma could renew their rivalry.

If I were Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, even Colorado and Missouri I would be nervous.

I don't know if the President's would go for this. But Texas, A & M, Oklahoma will do what in their best interest. If past performance predicts future performance, something may well happen here.

I'm not sure how splitting gains them an extra home game? The NCAA limit on games, to my knowledge, is 14 specifically allowing for 12 regular season games, a conference championship game, and a bowl game.

I don't believe if you eliminate a conference championship game, you get to play a 13th game during the regular season.

And while the football monies might be the same, the bb monies wouldn't nearly be the same without Kansas and Missouri. So if they do split, they better take at least Kansas with them for basketball to get the same amount of $$$ there.

Cheers,
Neil

Metropolis777 Wrote:

Shannon Panther Wrote:I suspect that Iowa State and Baylor are the biggest liabilities. Colorado won the B12 North the previous 2 years. Plus Colorado brings bigger TV markets than does Iowa.

Colorado is a major problem. While having a bigger TV market, they really don't garner much bigger ratings. Additionally, they are notorious for not travelling to bowl games not named the Fiesta or Holiday Bowl. CU is a bowl game's worst nightmare.


But, it's funny that it is a Denver outlet whining about this. They will have absolutely no say in what happens. The decision makers in the Big 12 are Texas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and to a lesser extent Texas A&M. The rest of the schools will hope to tag along with those 4, some better than others.

If there is a disolution of the Big 12 in the future, it will be in the favor of southern football centric conference much like the old SWC and Colorado would probably be left out in the cold.

Colorado is also bleeding in red ink in the athletics dept.

Arkansas was the team that got the SWC split going. The conference had far too many teams on probation at a single time, keeping many teams off TV. Arkansas left, then Texas and Texas A&M were going to consider offers from other conferences, Texas from the PAC-10, TAMU from the SEC.

Supposedly the legislature in TX wanted Texas and TAMU in the same conference, so TAMU never became SEC team #12 (S. Carolina did) and the PAC-10 wanted Texas, but not TAMU. So the Big 8 decided that they were going to expand into Texas with those two schools. Things then become murky as supposedly political power plays were pulled and Texas Tech and Baylor were invited as well.

There was some on the C-USA board from the San Antonio paper a while back about the demise of the SWC and the formation of the Big 12.

Baylor is also rumored to be swimming in red ink. But as a private university, it does not have to release the amount of its deficit to the pubic. Baylor does not have a TV market. It does not have the resources to compete with the large, public institutions in the Big 12. Baylor is the only team in the history of Big 12 that has yet to go to a bowl game.

As Mattsarz notes Texas and Texas A & M were "forced" to take Baylor along with them. At the time of the break-up of the SWC and the formation of the Big 12, Ann Richards was the Governor Texas and Bob Bullock was the Lieutenant Governor. Both were Baylor graduates. It was rumored that they communicated to Texas and A & M that it would be a good idea to take Baylor instead of fight possible cuts in fundings etc. There were some rumored threats made that the Texas legislature would fight A & M and Texas from leaving the SWC if Baylor was left behind. There is no love loss between A & M, Texas and Baylor. Baylor does not have the political clout in Austin it once had. Both the Aggies and Longhorns would throw Baylor under the bus in a heartbeat if it was to their financial benefit.

I would suspect that schools including Iowa State, Baylor, and Kansas State need to start worrying.