Scheduling Schemes for Conferences with Two Six-Team Divisions

Barring any further shifting by schools, the Pac 10 and Big 10 will each have 12 teams once the recently announced changes (Colorado and Utah to the Pac 10; Nebraska to the Big 10) go into effect in the next couple of years. It is widely expected that each of these conferences will divide things up into two six-team divisions. In addition to setting the stage for a conference championship game in football, a divisional system will clarify scheduling matters.

In football, a school potentially would play all of its intra-divisional rivals each season, but each of its extra-divisional rivals two out of every four years (once at each school's home). Variations on this theme exist, such at the permanent extra-divisional "designated-rival" concept used by the Atlantic Coast Conference and Southeastern Conference. In basketball (men's and women's), a commonly used system is to have a team play each of its intra-divisional rivals twice per year, with each team hosting one of the games ("home and home"), with one game per year against each extra-divisional opponent.

Sports Illustrated's Stewart Mandel, after some thoughtful consideration (for football) of competitive balance and the need to preserve annual match-ups of traditional rivals, offers his proposals for divisional line-ups in the Pac 10 and Big 10.

Realignment Quieting Down for this Year

With the shifting of schools and conferences apparently dying down, the Orlando Sentinel asks whether or not more extensive realignment is still around the corner in the next few years.

Barring any new major developments (such as the Big 10 seeking additional new members beyond Nebraska), the final few steps for this year would seem to include:

*Utah moving from the Mountain West Conference to the Pac 10, to give the latter 12 teams.

*The Western Athletic Conference (WAC) seeking one (or more) teams to replace Boise State, which moved to the Mountain West. According to this article, contenders to join the WAC include the University of Montana, Sacramento State, Portland State, and UC Davis. 

Big 12 Will Remain

The Big 12 (minus Colorado and Nebraska) is remaining intact. The University of Texas, which presumably was the Pac 10's primary target, worked out a favorable television agreement to stay with the Big 12. Under the new agreement, UT retains the right to create its own "Longhorn TV Network," in addition to the Big 12 leaguewide package. A solo network for UT apparently would not have been possible within the Pac 10 deal being discussed.

UT's press conference on its non-departure will be webcast later this morning, at 10:00 am Central.

The conventional wisdom is that the Pac 10 will now go after Utah (from the Mountain West Conference) to bring its size to 12 teams, but go no larger.

Big 12 Exodus Loses Momentum

The expected shift of several Big 12 teams to the Pac 10 seems to have lost a little momentum, for now at least. According to this Kansas City Star article, "[Big 12 commissioner Dan] Beebe’s efforts to halt a mass exodus from the Big 12 might be gaining at least a tenuous foothold." Also, "Orangeblood" writer Chip Brown's latest Twitter "tweets" are focusing on the potential outcome of the Big 12 remaining relatively intact.

Provided no other defections take place beyond the already-departed Colorado and Nebraska, we would have, for the moment, the bizarre situation of the Big 10 having 12 teams, and the Big 12 having 10.

Whether the Big 12 would at some point invite teams such as Texas Christian University and the University of Houston, to get back to actually having 12 teams, remains to be seen. Perhaps as a pitch to move to a more prominent circuit than its current Conference USA home, UH announced plans to build a completely new football stadium on the site of its current one and renovate its basketball arena, Hofheinz Pavilion. Reliant Stadium, home of the NFL's Houston Texans, would of course also be available, for example, for when UH (hypothetically) hosted Texas.

Academics and Realignment

Regarding the academic aspect of conference realignment, an organization whose name you may have seen bandied about is the AAU. Not the Amateur Athletic Union, but rather the Association of American Universities. The latter is an elite consortium of 63 research universities (61 in the U.S., two in Canada). When schools discuss wanting to be in a conference with academically comparable institutions, the AAU is usually the yardstick. I have gone ahead and mapped out AAU membership in the conferences that are at the center of the realignment talk.

The Big 10 stands alone in all of its current members (plus incoming Nebraska) having achieved AAU membership. In fact, not even the Ivy League can make that claim, as Dartmouth has not qualified (the Chronicle of Higher Education suggests it may be because the school "has long emphasized undergraduate education"). The only non-AAU institution the Big 10 would be willing to take in, it appears, is Notre Dame.

As the realignment process continues to unfold, the map above will show how conferences are strengthening themselves academically -- or not.

UPDATE: The University of Nebraska was officially dropped from the AAU in April 2011, whereas Syracuse University has pulled out on its own. According to this Chronicle of Higher Education article: "It's not clear what prompted the special reviews of Nebraska and Syracuse last year, except that they ranked at the bottom of the AAU metrics."

Brief Items: Boise State, Texas Tech, Nebraska

A few brief items:

Boise State yesterday moved from the Western Athletic Conference (WAC) to the Mountain West Conference. I guess the Mountain West's wait-and-see period, alluded to in one of my earlier postings, was short-lived.

The Lubbock Avalanche-Journal (isn't that a cool name for our newspaper?) speculates on how a possible move of Texas Tech to the Pac 10 would affect the city's economy.

The Sports Economist blog compares Nebraskas's average travel distance to its opponents' cities within the Big 12 and Big 10. Short answer: Excluding the Penn State trip, the Cornhuskers' flights for conference play won't be that much longer than they used to be.

T-Shirt to Document Big 12 Changes

Below is a t-shirt I purchased upon joining the Texas Tech faculty in 1997, and which I wore today. With the help of some PowerPoint editing (especially the transparency feature of color filling, of which I've become enamored) and the ability to save as a JPEG, I've created the following display to denote the exits of schools from the Big 12 conference. I'll post updated versions as circumstances warrant -- and I think the tinting of new squares will indeed become warranted.

AFTERNOON UPDATE: Nebraska has officially announced its plans to move to the Big 10.

----------

Coming up in about an hour (at 1:00 Central), huskers.com will carry live the Nebraska Regents meeting, at which AD Tom Osborne and Chancellor Harvey Perlman will make a presentation. Look for a Nebraska move to the Big 10.

Another rumor I've seen is that Missouri may be considering (or be under consideration) for a spot in the SEC. Missouri would give Texas A&M a former Big 12 traveling mate, should the Aggies end up making the switch to the SEC. Geographically, Missouri is contiguous with Arkansas, who is in the SEC.

Colorado, Nebraska, Texas A&M and Other Updates

LATE NIGHT UPDATE: Many people have taken to the airwaves and Internet, claiming the Kansas City report from this afternoon (immediately below) has no substance. However, a possible scenario of Texas A&M going to the SEC has not been so readily knocked down. In reference to the plan for A&M, UT, and four other Big 12 schools to join the Pac 10, the linked article states that:

...Texas A&M isn't yet sold on the package. The Aggies have historic rivals in the SEC, including Arkansas and LSU. They would also give the SEC, which includes football powers Florida and defending national champion Alabama, a key entry point into the Texas market.

As can be seen in the map I made for this blog's initial posting, A&M is basically just over the Texas-Louisiana border from SEC territory, but virtually half the length of the entire country away from most of the current Pac 10 schools.

----------

AFTERNOON UPDATE: Here's a bolt out of the blue. A Kansas City TV station reports that Texas and Texas A&M may be going to the Big 10 (not the Pac 10), with Oklahoma looking into the SEC!

If this comes to fruition, the Pac 10 (having added Colorado, see below) may just want to add one more school (perhaps Utah) to end up at 12 schools, the necessary amount for a conference-championship football game.

----------

In what appears to be the first official declaration of a team switching conferences -- acknowledged by both the league and the school -- Colorado will be moving to the Pac 10. As the linked article notes, a key factor is that the Pac 10 will gain access to the Denver television market (CU is in Boulder, which is just 25 miles from Denver). The Colorado announcement appears to extinguish Baylor's hopes of joining its Texas mates UT, Texas A&M, and Texas Tech en route to the Pac 10 (along with CU, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State). As a large, public university, Colorado also fits the prototype of a Pac 10 school (even the Pac 10's private institutions, USC and Stanford, have large enrollments).

A Nebraska-to-the-Big-10 announcement could come tomorrow. This USA Today article takes a more cautious tone, however. Meanwhile, there seems to be some buzz that Missouri's status as a possible Big 10 invitee is a little more tenuous than once thought.

Political Factors in Realignment

In yesterday's opening post of the blog, I contended that several factors were involved in conference realignment, including money (primarily), geography, academics, etc. In today's entry, I'd like to discuss political factors. Yesterday, columnist David Teel of the Daily Press (Newport News, Virginia) reported feeling a sense of deja vu over political involvement in athletic affairs. Writes Teel:

Many of us were stunned seven summers ago when then-Gov. Mark Warner wielded his influence to assure Virginia Tech's inclusion in ACC expansion...

With the Pacific 10 Conference poised to pilfer half of the Big 12, Texas politicos are following suit.

Of concern to some here in Texas is that Baylor be included (instead of Colorado) with Texas, Texas A&M, and Texas Tech in their (possible) exodus to the Pac 10. In fact, Baylor (and Texas Tech) were part of apparent political machinations back in the early-mid 1990s, when the old Big 8 conference was planning to expand by taking in schools from the now-defunct Southwest Conference. Texas and Texas A&M were safely in, but it remained to be determined who among Baylor, Texas Tech, and Texas Christian would merge with the Big 8. Ultimately, it was Baylor and Tech, yielding what we now know as the Big 12. In 2006, Brian Davis of the Dallas Morning News wrote a historical analysis of how the Big 12 came together. As Davis notes, different people have different recollections, but here's the money quote (both figuratively and literally):
 
The late Bob Bullock, the state's lieutenant governor, had degrees from Tech and Baylor. Pete Laney, a Tech grad, was the House Speaker in 1994, the year everything came to pass...
 
UT and A&M officials "came in and said here's what are we going to do, and I said, 'Not without Tech,' " Laney said. "Then, they went across the hall, and Bullock said the same thing about Baylor.

"When they came by to visit with us about that, they remembered that they got a lot of revenue from the state for education. You could say they were reminded of that."

Texas is not the only state with politicians getting involved. Iowa Governor Chet Culver has been speaking out on behalf of Iowa State, a current Big 12 member who has not been invited (to our knowledge) to any other conference's prom. Both in terms of geography and its rivalry with the University of Iowa, Iowa State would seem to be a good fit for the Big 10. This possibility is discussed in the linked article, but only a little bit. However, ISU probably would not bring in many new television viewers who are not already drawn in by the University of Iowa. Gov. Culver is nothing, if not determined:
 
Culver said he wasn’t sure what specific role he would play, but said he would “let the athletic directors and presidents know that I stand ready to go anywhere and do anything to make darn sure that Iowa State and Iowa come out on top.”

Welcome

Welcome to my latest blog, devoted to following -- and analyzing -- the latest news on conference realignment. As shown in the above graphic, most of the discussion at this time centers on the expansionist plans of the Pacific 10 and Big 10 (which actually has 11 schools), with the Big 12 at the risk of implosion. I have ties to all three of these conferences, being a professor at Texas Tech (Big 12), a Ph.D. recipient from the University of Michigan (Big 10), and an undergraduate alumnus of UCLA (Pac 10). I don't claim to be the nation's greatest expert on conference realignment, but I feel I have a decent hand on the pulse of regions likely to be affected.

Though the graphic may look somewhat complicated, all you really have to focus on is green (for the Pac 10), red (for the Big 12), and blue (for the Big 10). Thus, the "TT" letters for Texas Tech are in red to denote the school's current conference, but it's accompanied by a green arrow pointing west, symbolizing the Red Raiders' apparent invitation (along with five other Big 12 schools) to join the Pac 10. Nebraska and Missouri, with blue arrows pointing east, reportedly are being invited to join the Big 10. You can click on the graphic to enlarge it.

Other scenarios have implicated the Southeastern Conference (SEC), Big East (focusing on its northeastern base of schools such as UConn, Syracuse, and Rutgers), and the Mountain West. Given that these scenarios appear to be on the back-burner presently, I have depicted only the general regions for these conferences, not the individual schools. The Mountain West, in fact, apparently has decided to stay clear of the expansion talk for now and wait to see how things shake out with the other conferences.

One of the great oddities (to me at least) of all the apparent scheming is that the University of Kansas (KU), which has one of history's greatest men's college-basketball programs but only a sporadically good football program, may be left without a major conference. Right now, KU's administration appears to be begging Nebraska to stay in the Big 12, to stabilize the conference somewhat.

At the heart of all the expansion/realignment talk is -- what else? -- money. The Big 10 already has its own comprehensive television network, available on cable/satellite systems in the Midwest and elsewhere, and is reportedly eager to expand into some of the Northeast's major metropolitan areas. Notre Dame, geographically proximate to Big 10 schools and already an established football rival of Michigan, MSU, and Purdue, would be a big coup for the Big 10. The South Bend, Ind. school would have to give up its traditional independent status for football, and discontinue or perhaps modify its exclusive NBC contract. (Notre Dame currently competes in the Big East in sports other than football.) 

No discussion of money would be complete, of course, without the University of Texas, Austin. Between the school's $7.2 billion endowment, large fan base (including an estimated 450,000 living alumni), and huge athletic revenues, the Longhorns would potentially be an attractive catch for the Pac 10, Big 10, or SEC (having UT in the Big 10, which is based in the upper Midwest, would really seem odd, though). According to this article, "...last week the Big 12 announced that its members divided about $139 million in revenue in 2009-10. The Longhorns, meanwhile, brought in $138.5 million on their own in 2008-09." 

Besides money, media, and geography, the realignment/expansion talk also brings in political, academic, and logistical (e.g., how often would Texas Tech travel from Lubbock to Pullman, Wash. to play WSU in men's golf and women's volleyball) factors. These are the kinds of issues you can look forward to seeing addressed in the coming weeks and months. I invite everyone to use the Comments feature on this blog or e-mail me via my faculty webpage (linked in the upper-right corner) to share your opinions.

To kick things off, here's a link to a recent piece by SI.com's Stewart Mandel on 16 possible scenarios for conference realignment.