I will try to string together my general thoughts on expansion later. However, for now I have a very basic question. What is the rush to add Utah to Pac-10? What do we lose by waiting another year or two? It sure doesn't sound like we have not heard the last of conference re-alignment.
In fact the more I hear about the basis upon of which Big-Tex (12-2) was 'saved' the more unstable it sounds. Here is the kicker apparently a TV deal is not even in place. From John Taylor at NBC's College Football Talk:
Perhaps the biggest news coming out commissioner Dan Beebe's press conference this afternoon -- other than the fact that Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Baylor and Iowa State are officially the rest of the Big 12's biznatches -- is the fact that there is no new television in place for the Big 12. [...[
In the wake of Texas recommitting to the league Monday, multiple reports had a tweaked television deal paying Texas upwards of $25 million -- and other schools at least doubling what they've been receiving -- as the linchpin in keeping the Big 12 intact.Beebe said earlier today that there is no new TV deal from either FOX or ESPN/ABC; rather, the conference was assured -- with those assurances being relayed to all ten schools -- by various "consultants that we are in a tremendous position to reach agreements to put us on par with anyone in the country." Additionally, there is no signed agreement that will keep the conference together. Instead, Beebe is taking them all at their word that they will remain true to the conference.(About that Arizona oceanfront property, Mr. Beebe...)
As for the five schools mentioned in the opening of this post? All five agreed to give up their share of penalties Colorado and Nebraska will have to pay, forking that money over instead to, mostly, Texas, Oklahoma and Texas A&M.Oh yeah, we can see this newly-configured Big 12 having long-term viability. Yep.