From a Big Ten standpoint, there is very little downside to Conference expansion. All traditional rivalries will be preserved, more money will flow into the Conference, more markets for TV and recruiting will open up, many competing conferences will be weakened, and the Big Ten will likely move into a primary driver seat among all competitors for the next decade because of its shear breadth, exposure, and size.

There are few legit expansion possibilities that would pull teams from distance geographic areas. For instance, Rutgers sounds far away, but in reality it is no farther from Penn State than Penn State is from Ohio State, let alone Penn State’s distance from Minnesota or Iowa. Missouri is the same with schools like Iowa and Illinois. Relatively close in proximity. Nebraska is a bit farther, but it would be worth it due to its likely neighbor Missouri and the fact that it has such storied tradition. Notre Dame is a no brainer.

As for the size limits on a Conference, 16 teams is likely a nice cap. It allows for two massive eight team divisions and a playoff that should pit a pair of studs together for all the marbles. If I could hand pick it, I would take Notre Dame, Nebraska, and Rutgers (assuming Texas is a near impossibility) and stop at 14. All schools improve or fit right into the Conference’s academics and have either great traditions, massive TV markets, or both.

Notre Dame has a particular brand available to them as an Independent. They are free to negotiate their own deals, sign their own endorsement contracts, schedule their own games, market themselves as a truly National Conferenceless team, and keep every nickel of their money to themselves including the amount paid out in BCS games ($17 million that doesn’t have to be shared). ND runs the risk of being a solid, but unspectacular team in a Big Ten that features a much higher level of opposition than they are used to facing. Ohio State, Penn State, Wisconsin, and probably Iowa should beat ND on a neutral field. Michigan State, Purdue, and maybe even Minnesota could challenge them.

As for the expansion fallout, I agree. That is way too early to tell. The Big Ten is holding all the cards right now. They’ll make the first move and then the rest will play out behind them. Looking at these:

1. Will Texas A&M join the PAC-10? I doubt it. I don’t see the Texas State Legislature getting involved in this situation, but maybe they do.
2. Will Texas leave the Big 12 for the SEC? Doubt that, too. Possible, but only in the most dire of circumstances, i.e. the Big 12 collapses.
3. Colorado is a high probability to move to the PAC-10. Lower level of competition compared to the Big 12, more money in a better package deal, and a better chance at allowing themselves to recruit in California and Texas.
4. Academics and the SEC are like night and day. They don’t rhyme at all.
5. The Big 10 will not balk at Nebraska. Quality academics, expanded market, and a great storied tradition.
6. Missouri is a different story. They bring a market, but little else. They are not high on my priority list, but if the Big Ten can’t get some other big boys, they will likely default to Missouri and pull St. Louis and Kansas City markets with regional rivalries.
7. SEC changes would likely be 3-5 years down the road. They wouldn’t play under that old contract for very long, so I doubt that’s a major concern for them. And I’m not sure the SEC has a Big Ten model revenue sharing plan.

Just for information, I believe in the last BCS negotiations that Notre Dame traded a smaller chunk of a BCS payout for a guaranteed payout every year.http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/7659924/

The Texas legislature is a good point but if the Big 12 really starts to crumble Texas may not have a choice and basically make an argument that if they don't get to join another conference without A&M that they'll be left behind in the new world of college football.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

What they seemed to have done last time was say "Hey Texas... want state funding? Then A&M comes along too." It might be a bluff, but it's one hell of a bluff.

The big hold-up here is academics. Texas administrators vocally took some shots at some of the SEC schools back in the 90s, and that really rubbed a lot of those schools the wrong way. Time and money heals all wounds, but a similar dynamic could play out. I think Texas in the SEC is more likely, ultimately, that Texas in the Pac 10.

Only if the Pac 10 will have them, and it's not clear they will. All 10 university presidents have to agree to any expansion, and Stanford raised complaints about the academic credentials of Texas last time this happened. If invited, there's a good chance Colorado switches, but it's not in their hands.

No one one, iffy on two, yes on three. Just going of the US News and World Report Rankings (which, despite their protestations, administrators care a great deal about), the lowest ranked Big 10 school is Iowa at #71. Nebraska is #96, and Missouri is #102. The presidents could easily balk at accepting either one of those schools.

Nebraska brings no real markets with it either, but it does likely raise advertising revenue within the existing Big 10 Network footprint, and it would raise subscriptions in non-footprint areas. The fan base is very diffuse though. Picking up Omaha or even Kansas City isn't a priority.

St. Louis is a pretty big deal. The only danger is that you might eventually pick it up anyway with Illinois, but grabbing St. Louis would increase revenue immediately. Travel costs would be kept lower for most nonrevenue sports by taking Missouri as well; these are nontrivial. If the expansion is a one-off thing, I still think Missouri is the most likely candidate.

I'm not familiar with the SEC revenue sharing plan, but I believe it is more equitable than the Big 12's. However, the SEC contract isn't that old -- they just signed it a year ago with ESPN. I believe it locks them in for 15 years and severely limits their ability to market to third parties, including the creation of a legitimate "SEC Network" with equity ownership. Splitting the pie in the SEC simply makes the pieces get smaller. Because of the Big 10's equity stake in the Big 10 Network, adding parties can grow the pie as well.

I think Texas is the one school that could plausibly go independent, given their massive fanbase, success across sports, and control of key markets all by themselves. They are creating an independent sports network in the Big 10 Network mold just for their school. Where that leaves A&M is anyone's guess, but if certain dominoes start to fall, I wouldn't be surprised to see a rump Big Eight (Southwest Conference?) consisting of the Texas Schools, the Oklahoma schools, and the Kansas schools with inequal revenue sharing and the terms pretty much dictated by Texas and Oklahoma.

_________________
Fire Phil Emery

Looks like Notre Dame to the Big10 talks are heating back up.

ESPN reported this morning that media outlets in Omaha said that Nebraska would confirm it is going to the Big Ten by Friday.

_________________