College Football Conference Realignment: Possible Pac-12 Targets If Big12 Falls

Though Texas A&M’s attempted escape from the Longhorn driven Big 12 conference may have been thwarted the “for now” clause in the SEC’s less than solid rejection of the Aggies bid to join makes you think that the issue is far from closed.

And, if A&M does flee and the Big 12 does dissolve (despite what Commissioner Dan Bebee claims regarding the long-term stability of the league) all hell could literally break loose among the remaining BCS conferences.

With all the talk of SEC expansion and ACC and Big 12 reductions (and possible extinction) what about the effects of such major changes to the Pac-12?

Yes, the Pac-12 just added Colorado and Utah for the 2011 season but what happens beyond those moves if the SEC goes “super size” and teams become available from the Big 12 (and perhaps beyond)?

The following slideshow pinpoints eight institutions that are most likely to be on the Pac-12’s radar if the dominoes of conference realignment begin, once again, to fall.

Some of the schools listed would be primary targets if the Pac-12 adds two teams and others would be secondary and necessary if the SEC moves to 16 teams and the pacific association decides to follow suit.

Texas Tech

Texas Tech presents several inherent advantages should the Pac-12 require expansion.

First, Tech doesn’t have a “partner” that would either need to come along with them or represent an ugly, expensive divorce if they split.  Kansas has Kansas State, Oklahoma has Oklahoma State and of course Texas has Texas A&M; sure, the Red Raiders have some solid rivalries among this group (especially with their fellow Texas schools) but breaking-up wouldn’t be near as hard to do.

The other advantageous side of the “partner” coin is that by adding Tech (or another “single” team) you can pick up their TV market and then perhaps another (by say coupling Tech with BYU or Boise State) while picking up KU/KSU or OU/OSU represents in reality only one additional media market.

Secondly, Tech is geographically closer to the Pac-12 family than any other Big 12 school (except for Colorado who has already joined up) which makes travel and regional familiarity more advantageous.

Third, Texas Tech is the Pac-12’s most reasonable entry point into the State of Texas; the Red Raiders aren’t the state’s flagship university by any stretch of the imagination but when Texas viewers have a choice between watching UCLA play or Tech play they’ll no doubt tune in to watch the Red Raiders.

Next, the Red Raiders are a rock solid football program but they are not a perennial powerhouse so their addition, while respectable and offering a compelling opponent, won’t be like shooting yourself in the foot and asking for losses (like adding Texas or Oklahoma would be).

Also, you have to think that Tech offers a potential member school that would not necessarily represent the sort of recruiting competition that a team that was too close would (i.e. it’s not like the Red Raiders will really impact the California recruiting scene).

Lastly, Tech has a bit of in-conference history with both Arizona and Arizona State as all three competed as members of the now defunct Border Intercollegiate Athletic Association from the 1930’s to late 1950’s.

Oklahoma State

Oklahoma State presents many of the same attractive qualities for possible Pac-12 membership as does Texas Tech but they have the advantage (and disadvantage) of being coupled with Oklahoma.

Yes, the Cowboys are geographically accessible, a worthy but not overwhelming opponent, a non-competitive recruiting threat and represent a new market for the Pac-12 to delve into…but the issue of the Sooners presents an intriguing plus (or minus).

On the up side, if Oklahoma could be convinced to join with Oklahoma State then all the sudden the Cowboys alluring attractiveness to any number of new conferences is vastly improved (who wouldn’t want the Sooners on board).

On the flip side, can or will Oklahoma State go without Oklahoma?  

If the Cowboys come without the Sooners how does this affect their long term stability and marketability (i.e. can they survive without them)?

And, if the Sooners do come too, now you’re just bringing in one TV market rather than having a shot at two, recruiting becomes under fire and is this more stiff competition than the Pac-12 realistically wants to introduce to their current members?

At the end of the day and regardless of any of this.  If the Big 12 was to dissolve sooner rather than later, the Cowboys upswing in terms of football performance can’t help but make them more attractive than almost any other school on this list.

Kansas

Kansas’ recent football performance makes them seem a less attractive candidate for being plucked by the Pac-12 than others, but that fact disguises a bigger truth; the Jayhawks have one of the best basketball programs in the nation.

Yes, Kansas is a great university and they offer the immediate plus of amping up Pac-12 basketball to a whole new level (plus you have the advantage that Tech and Oklahoma State both offer from both a non competitive recruiting standpoint and from a “softer” football opponent angle).

The drawbacks of extending membership to the Jayhawks are fairly obvious; Kansas is not a huge TV market, Kansas State would need to be included (not necessarily a bad thing but it would mean only one added TV market) and geographically Kansas is a stretch for the Pac-12.

Kansas State

Though Kansas State been more consistent over the last two decades from a football point of view – you don’t have nearly the basketball punch you would have by taking a harder look at Kansas.

Again, Kansas State is a tremendous university but in targeting the Wildcats you have some of the same inherent disadvantages that you have with Kansas (again, without the basketball benefit).

Its geography, its TV market, its media attractiveness and it’s the “couple skate only” concept.

Missouri

Missouri was discussed as a possible addition to the Big Ten last year and has been part of the SEC expansion talk this year; this adds up to the Tigers being, apparently, an attractive target for big conference realignment talk.

Missouri makes a lot less sense for the Pac-12 (especially from a geographic standpoint where they are way out) than do other but they offer the “single” team advantage and carry their own TV market which is sizeable.

I don’t see Missouri as being a serious object for the pacific coalition expansion but not mentioning them would be remiss, due to their alluring charm.

To me, if the Big 12 dissolves, the Big Ten makes the most sense for Mizzou.

Boise State

Boise State represents the first of three non-Big 12 teams on this list that might be a target for Pac-12 expansion if (1). The Big 12 folds and (2). The Pac-12 opts to “super size” to 16 teams, a move which could be a reaction to the SEC making a similar enlargement.

Though this seems like a stretch, it is a reasonable result of a Big 12 meltdown.

Boise State is attractive for some fairly obvious reasons (fan base, media popularity, surging success, geographic location, vibrant turf, etc.) and at some point the Broncos will be attempting to make a move into a BCS conference if the MWC doesn’t get the nod in the short-term future.

The Pac-12 is the most obvious BCS destination for Boise State and a Big 12 dissolution could do nothing but help keep this possibility alive.

Nevada

Nevada is a less palpable choice for Pac-12 interest than Boise State (or BYU for that matter) but they too offer a compelling choice should four teams need to be added.

The Wolfpack tenders not only a solid football program.  They also represent what would be an intriguing addition to the list of westward states that are Pac-12 members.

One of the plethora of reasons that college football is such a passionate affair is pitting neighboring states against one another on the field of battle.  In this instance why not add Nevada versus California, Nevada versus Arizona, Nevada versus Oregon and Nevada versus Colorado to the list of other provocative interstate skirmishes?

Nevada might have the most work to do (of any other team on this list) to raise their level of play up to the standards of the Pac-12 but their move to the MWC in 2012 is indicative of their commitment to taking things to the next level.

Really, the down sides to Nevada are all about image, recruiting competition and the lack of a huge TV market.

BYU

BYU’s declaration of independence last fall has, thus far, been treated by the media as a temporary move necessary for the Cougars to finally find an automatic bid to the BCS.

Whether this is based in truth or not.  The immediate result is that BYU will be mentioned as a possible candidate for inclusion in any number of conferences who are looking to either expand or replace fleeing members.

This is evident in BYU’s name being mentioned as a replacement for Texas A&M should they leave the Big 12.  This makes it reasonable to think they would also be considered if the Pac-12 was expanding.

The Cougars offer the Pac-12 geographic sensibilities (they could also renew their rivalry with Utah), they bring to the table what is actually a nationwide TV audience rather than a regional base (via BYU-TV which is avidly watched by a huge fan base across the country) and they have great name recognition.

The disadvantages seem minimal.   Unless of course, BYU is a demanding constituent who looks to preserve some of the freedom they earned from going independent…this scenario would obviously decrease the compliance necessary to keep in-conference equality readily available.