The Pac-10 gets its 12th team

The Pac-10 didn't take long to recover from its broken heart:

The Pac-10 invited Utah to become the 12th member of the conference Wednesday, two days after being turned down by Texas, Oklahoma and three other Big 12 schools.

Utah officials did not immediately say whether the invitation would be accepted. However, a source tells ESPN that Utah will join the Pac-10.

Obviously. I'm sure there'll be a lot of debate over where to stay in the Mountain West or head to the Pac-10. "Let's see, would you like to keep your $1.33 million in TV revenue or would you like $15 million, a shot at an automatic BCS bid and a huge boost in prominence?" Tough call. The only negative anyone has come up with is the split from BYU, but some minor scheduling adjustments should take care of that and keep The Holy War alive and well as a nonconference matchup.

From the Pac-10's standpoint, Utah is actually a pretty good addition. Good football team (at least middle of the pack in the Pac-10), good basketball team, good TV market (Salt Lake City is the 31st-largest in the country) ... nothing spectacular but nothing not to like. Getting more quality competition is never a bad thing.

Overall, though, the Pac-10 didn't really do anything to increase its national relevance. Nobody east of the Mississippi will be drawn to the impending Pac-10 Network to see Utah-Arizona or Colorado-Washington or just about any other combination outside of USC-Oregon. In other words, Utah and Colorado are both fine additions, but they represent expansion for expansion's sake. The important thing is that the new Pac-10 can split into two divisions, hold a championship game, start a network and bring in a little extra money via Denver and Salt Lake City. The lesson: If there's more money, everybody's happy.

The Denver Post reports that the new divisions will look like this:

South	North
USC	Cal
UCLA	Stanford
Arizona	Oregon
Arizona St.	Oregon St.
Utah	Washington
Colorado	Washington St.

No surprises there. One of the big concerns with a divisional split was that the Washington, Oregon and Arizona schools wanted to keep their regular trips to California to help with recruiting. Separating Stanford and Cal from USC and UCLA makes that possible and still retains most geographic connections. The only quasi-rivalry that might be lost some years is USC-Cal; that's manageable.

I've seen a bunch of articles praising Larry Scott for his aggressive moves in expansion, and I'll give him credit for trying to do something EXTREMELY bold. But at the end of the day, the Pac-10 pretty much is what it was a week ago except with one more good team (one that'll finally get a chance to test itself against consistently strong competition) and one more mediocre team. And a championship game, of course.

And then there's the Mountain West. The poor, poor Mountain West. Just five days ago, the addition of Boise State seemed like the first step toward a guaranteed automatic BCS bid. With Utah, BYU, TCU and Boise State? That's a strong conference, probably even better than the Big East. I even said this at the time:

... even if the Big 12 stays intact, the Mountain West will be a lot stronger coming out of expansion than it was going in.

Errrr yeah. I obviously didn't foresee the current scenario. As it is, we're right back to square one. There's one excellent team (Boise taking Utah's place) and two consistently very good teams (BYU and TCU). Unless the MWC can steal another good program from a major conference (extremely doubtful), it's gonna be pretty hard to land that coveted auto-bid.

So close and yet so far ...

The story of expansion in hilarious MS Paint

There's a guy on a Texas message board who does awesome stuff with MS Paint. That's pretty much all the explanation you need. Enjoy:


























The end.

Coaching signals FTW

I've seen some pretty crazy coaching hand signals, but the Oklahoma assistant (I can't tell who it is) at the very bottom right corner of the screen in this video is either extremely aroused or should probably come up with a new signal for whatever he's trying to call:



I mean, what kind of play is that?

The Big 12 is still kickin'

So ... I guess we won't be seeing a Pac-16. Texas has decided to save the Big 12 -- and about half the teams in it -- by choosing the status quo and the promise of $25 million or more per season in TV revenue.

This obviously takes care of any talk about superconferences, at least for now. The Pac-10 will likely stop at 12 teams and the Big 12 is probably stuck at 10, so until the Big Ten makes another move, there probably won't be a conference with more than 12 teams. Not exactly what we were expecting a few days ago, right?

But if you've looked at the details of Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe's sales pitch, you might have noticed something:

Texas stands to earn between $20 million and $25 million annually in television revenue in the reworked deal, including money from its own network, according to Orangebloods.com.

The Longhorns' network figures to generate between $3 million and $5 million, according to the Orangebloods.com report. Because the Big 12 has unequal revenue sharing, the deal will mean more money for Texas, Texas A&M and Oklahoma, who all would receive at least $20 million annually from the new deal.

The other seven schools in the Big 12 would make between $14 million and $17 million, doubling what they currently receive in TV revenue.

OK, let's figure this out. The Big Ten distributed between $20 million and $22 million in TV money to each team last year, part of which came from the ABC/ESPN contract and part of which came from the Big Ten Network. The SEC distributed about $17 million to each school from its contract with ESPN. The Big 12?

1. Texas: $10.2 million
2. Oklahoma: $9.8 million
3. Kansas: $9.24 million
4. Texas A&M: $9.22 million
5. Nebraska: $9.1 million
6. Missouri: $8.4 million
7. Texas Tech: $8.23 million
8. Kansas State: $8.21 million
9. Oklahoma State: $8.1 million
10. Colorado: $8.0 million
11. Iowa State: $7.4 million
12. Baylor: $7.1 million

Granted, the Big 12's TV deal was outdated and was set for a significant boost this offseason. But I highly doubt that it would've surpassed the SEC deal, and there's no way it would've gone past the Big Ten's total revenue package. And that's WITH Nebraska and Colorado. Yet according to Beebe, the revenue-sharing payouts will now look something like this:

1. Texas: $22 million
2. Oklahoma: $20 million
3. Texas A&M: $20 million
4. Everyone else: $15 million

Add it all up and that's a total of $167 million a year, or $16.7 million a team. Keep in mind that the second- or third-most valuable program (Nebraska) is gone along with the third-biggest market (Denver) the conference owned. Is the Big 12 run by the underpants gnomes? Because the new plan looks something like this:

1. Lose two valuable schools
2. ?
3. Profit

There must be something I'm missing. Fox Sports will be expected to pay the same amount for what's basically Texas, Oklahoma and Conference USA as ESPN is paying for the SEC? Yeah, I don't get it. Maybe the Big 12 can get that amount, but if so, Fox is flat-out stupid.

The more likely scenario: Beebe is pulling numbers out of his ass in a desperate bid to keep his conference alive. Not that I can blame him; it was his only chance to avoid what would have been the complete and utter collapse of the Big 12. But why would anyone more than double the value of a TV contract for a conference that now has one nationally relevant game (Texas-Oklahoma) a year? I could go on, but I think you get the idea. I'll be pretty surprised if the actual payouts end up close to what's being promised.

The other thing that's weird is that the whole cause of the unrest in the Big 12 was the uneven revenue sharing. Texas got just over 10% of the conference's total TV money (a little over $10 million), so teams like Baylor and Iowa State were left with a much smaller portion (around $7 million). Nebraska, Missouri and the middle-of-the-pack schools got about $8.5 million or $9 million. So how's that new deal look, Missouri? Texas will now be raking in roughly 13% of the overall TV package, while the bottom seven schools will each be pulling in about 60-75% of that. Everyone besides Texas, Oklahoma and Texas A&M is now in even worse shape than before in terms of percentages. And the sad part is that they all need Texas so badly that they'd have signed off on just about anything.

At the end of the day, it was all about power for Texas. If it was about money, UT could have had about $30 million in TV money from the Big Ten and $500 million from the CIC for research. If it was about academics, UT could have gone to the Pac-10 and given the school a reputation boost. Doing neither of those things made a pretty clear statement. If you condensed the entire negotiation process into one conversation, it would have gone something like this:

Missouri: This sucks. I can't believe how unfairly you treat me, Texas. I'm outta here as soon as the Big Ten breaks up with Notre Dame.
Texas: Fine. Good luck with that. I'll go hang out with my other friends and laugh while lighting my Cuban cigars with $100 bills.
Missouri: Shit. You're right. Hey, wait a minute -- maybe we can work something out.
Texas: I'm listening ...

This all has a downside, of course. If/when another conference comes calling at some point in the future (if the Big Ten decides it wants Missouri, for example), what will stop anyone from bailing? Going to the Big Ten or Pac-10 would still represent a huge financial boost AND equal revenue sharing. If you're not Texas, Oklahoma or A&M, you have no reason to be loyal. And if Missouri or Kansas (or both) were to be pulled away, what's already a thin conference would become a complete joke. I'd think Texas would have to leave at that point.

A friend actually pointed that out and made a simple suggestion: Why doesn't the Pac-10 just invite Kansas, who would definitely accept? That'd probably weaken the Big 12 to the point where Texas would say, "Screw it, let's just get out of here and find somewhere stable where we can still make a ton of money." And if that happened, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State would come along too. They'll go where Texas goes. The other spot would be Texas A&M's (if they want it) or Texas Tech's (if A&M were to pick the SEC). Makes sense, right?

And eventually, that might be the Big 12's downfall. There are too many unhappy/mistreated partners that will be willing to leave at the drop of a hat. But it might not happen for a while (maybe never if the Big Ten doesn't want Missouri), and for Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Baylor and Iowa State, that must be an overwhelming relief.

As for the Pac-10, it sounds like Utah is likely next on the list. There's little value in expanding to 11 teams (not enough for a conference championship game); it's just a matter of which school will get the 12th ticket.

Side note: Adding Utah and Colorado is fine, but it's gotta be a little bit of a letdown after barely missing out on the Texas-Texas A&M-Oklahoma-Oklahoma State conglomerate. The Pac-10 Network (or whatever it'll be called) suddenly seems a little less interesting. The Big Ten, meanwhile, has to be feeling pretty good about itself. Think about it: The Big 12 is still alive but significantly weaker, the Pac-10 is pretty much the same as it was before but with two more teams ... the Big Ten is the only conference that's definitely stronger than it was last week.

I still think there's almost no chance that the Big Ten stops short of 14 teams, but Jim Delany said the other day that the conference will now revert to its original 12-to-18-month timeline, meaning we probably won't know anything (officially, anyway) until next offseason.

Unofficially, I don't think it's any secret that Notre Dame is still at the top of the list. And the more I hear, the more I think Notre Dame will eventually be one of those 14 (or 16) teams. It'll just be too easy for the Big Ten to split up the Big East. I see one of these two things happening:

1. The Big Ten will invite two schools -- probably Rutgers and Syracuse -- which is guaranteed to cause the Big East to implode and force Notre Dame to find a home for all its sports.
2. The Big Ten will tell the Big East that it intends to invite Rutgers and Syracuse, and this threat will force the Big East to give Notre Dame an ultimatum: join for football (and save the conference) or GTFO. Notre Dame obviously won't be joining the Big East for football, so they'll be in the same situation as in the previous scenario.

Either way, Notre Dame will need a home and the Big Ten will be happy to oblige. My guess is that the second scenario is a lot more likely, because I don't think the Big Ten wants to go to 16 teams unless it absolutely has to. Getting Notre Dame and one of Rutgers/Syracuse/Pitt/Maryland is preferable to getting Notre Dame and three of those schools, because those schools just don't provide enough in revenue to make up for their addition. The fewer schools added beyond Notre Dame, the more money everyone's sharing.

There's a rumor going around (I've heard this from more than one knowledgeable person) that Notre Dame has been offered a stepped invitation, basically ramping up the number of Big Ten games each season and becoming a full conference member the year after the NBC contract expires in 2015. That would be a pretty generous concession by the Big Ten, but I'm on board with whatever it takes. Notre Dame is still wildly valuable and extremely popular throughout the country; getting ND in the conference would have more financial impact than any move any other conference could make. And let's face it: Notre Dame belongs in the Big Ten.

So ... where were we? Oh yeah. Once the Pac-10 adds Utah, we'll probably be done with expansion for a while. Unless the Big Ten gets Notre Dame to sign up (I'm pretty sure Delany would accelerate his timeline for that), at which point everyone will go crazy again.

Catching up: Non-expansion stuff is still happening

* Masoli done at Oregon: This was a mere blip on the radar last week amid all the crazy expansion talk and the USC penalty-palooza, but Oregon QB Jeremiah Masoli was dismissed from the team for "failing to adhere to obligations" that were set this spring when he was suspended for the upcoming season. In case you're wondering what "failing to adhere to obligations" means, here ya go:

Masoli was stopped by Springfield police at 9:17 p.m. local time on Monday after exiting a driveway without stopping. At that time, the officer cited the former Ducks quarterback for driving with a suspended license and possession of one ounce or less of marijuana.

Brilliant. We're talking about a guy who just led Oregon to the Pac-10 title, was second-team All-Pac-10 and would have been a legitimate Heisman candidate next season. He fucked up once (stealing laptops from a frat house with teammate Garrett Embry)? OK. People make mistakes. I have no problem with him getting a conditional opportunity to work his way back. But to take that chance -- as well as any chance he had at the NFL -- and just smoke it away? What an idiot.

* The AP lets USC off the hook: Of all the stories and columns emanating from the USC punishment, the most confusing might have been the announcement by The Associated Press that the Trojans will get to keep their 2004 title. This part makes sense ...

"It would be impractical to (name a different champion)" AP sports editor Terry Taylor said. "It's been six years. Memories have faded and the poll board from that year is no longer intact."

... but why not leave the title vacant, which is what the BCS is expected to do? According to the official record books, USC didn't win its final regular-season game or the national championship game (because Reggie Bush was ineligible), so how can the AP still declare them the national champion? I don't get it. For once, the BCS has it right.

And I feel the same way about Bush's Heisman. If he was ineligible to play, how can you NOT strip him of the award? This is from the Heisman voting instructions:

"The (Heisman Trophy) recipient must be in compliance with the bylaws defining an NCAA student athlete."

He was breaking the most basic NCAA rule for the entire season in which he won the Heisman. What more would a player have to do to lose his award (as well as his future voting rights and seat at the ceremony)? You don't have to go back and name a winner or change your vote; just don't let him keep the honor he doesn't deserve.

* Anybody wanna transfer? It's open season at USC for juniors and seniors, who are free to be contacted by any program and free to transfer without sitting out a season due to the two-year postseason ban. But will anyone actually leave? Ehhhh ...

Here's the thing: Any upperclassman starter at USC is still in better shape in terms of exposure and NFL readiness than he would be by transferring. Bowl games don't matter that much. Guys who are platooning or sitting behind five other high school All-Americans, though, might look elsewhere. Any shot of college glory is gone now that USC can't play for a national title (or even play in a Rose Bowl) for the next two years, so if there's a starting job available at some other solid program, those guys might as well take it. It'll just be a matter of how sure a backup might be that he can win a starting job at a new program in a new system with only fall camp to prove himself.

The Orange County Register did a little asking around and got a "don't have plans to leave" response from backup QB Mitch Mustain and an "I am not leaving SC" tweet from sometimes-good/sometimes-benched running back C.J. Gable. Those would be (presumably) the two most coveted backups on the roster. So as much as most people would love to see a mass exodus, it ain't happenin'.

* Clemson loses a quarterback (probably): When the Colorado Rockies took Kyle Parker in the first round of last week's MLB draft, it probably spelled the end of his career at Clemson. Remember Drew Henson? Guys with a few million bucks on the table don't go back to college very often.

I was skeptical about Parker beating our former uber-recruit Willy Korn for the starting job last fall, but he did it -- and he turned out to be pretty good. He completed 55.5% of his passes and had 20 touchdown passes and just 12 interceptions, impressive numbers for a redshirt freshman who was spending half his time on another sport.

Assuming he won't be back, the starting job likely falls to athletic redshirt freshman Tajh Boyd, a one-time Tennessee commit who inexplicably had his scholarship offer pulled when Lane Kiffin took over at UT. Talent is what he has; experience is what he doesn't. With no C.J. Spiller and a completely unprepared QB taking over at the start of fall camp, Clemson's offense could be a little ugly early in the season (those games against North Texas and Presbyterian probably look like a blessing now). After that, it'll all depend on Boyd's development and whether he plays up to his recruiting hype or just plays like a freshman.

* Dorsey isn't coming to Michigan: Probably the most hyped recruit in Michigan's 2010 recruiting class was cornerback Demar Dorsey, ESPN's 12th-ranked player in the country. Note that I use the word "was." Naturally, since the RichRod era at UM seems to be cursed, Dorsey won't ever make it to Ann Arbor:

Michigan defensive back recruit Demar Dorsey has been released from his letter of intent after not being admitted to the school, his father said Wednesday, according to The Detroit News.

D'oh. The worst part is that he was technically qualified according to NCAA standards, but Michigan wouldn't admit him. This would normally cause me great irritation. However, two reports (at least one from an extremely reliable source) make it clear that Dorsey's transcripts were, ummm, questionable. Basically, his grades were in such poor shape heading into his senior year that the fact that he qualified automatically raised suspicion. That's not good -- just ask Derrick Rose.

As much as I'd love to add a five-star corner to UM's depleted secondary, I accept that there are some academic standards that simply have to be upheld. We're not talking about Florida State (which, coincidentally, is on Dorsey's short list of potential destinations). But I'm not gonna lie: It hurts to have a top recruit at a position of need yanked out of the class four months after Signing Day, especially knowing that it's probably bowl game or bust this season for Rodriguez.

* And that'll do it: Back to your regularly scheduled expansion talk ...

A date has been set

We'll get a decision from Texas on Tuesday:

University of Texas regents will meet next week to decide whether the Longhorns will remain in the Big 12 or switch to another conference.

The regents announced Friday that they will hold a meeting by telephone Tuesday for "discussion and appropriate action regarding athletic conference membership."

There's been a lot of speculation in the last 24 hours, but according to Chip Brown (a writer for Texas' Rivals affiliate who's made a name for himself with a lot of behind-the-scenes info on expansion), the outcome has already been decided:

Texas will announce its plans to join the Pac-10 after its regents meet next Tuesday, source confirm to Orangebloods.com.

While this guy seems to have established himself as reliable, keep in mind that four days is an eternity in the world of rumors and negotiations. If the Big Ten were to swoop in and make a persuasive pitch or if the Texas Legislature were to really put the pressure on UT to keep the Big 12 intact, I think it's still a possibility that the mass exodus to the Pac-10 could fall apart.

But if nothing changes in the next 96 hours, we should all start preparing ourselves for the Pac-16 and the death of the Big 12.

The Mountain West gets in on the action

This has been expected for a while now, but Boise State is finally making the leap to a legitimate conference:

Boise State is leaving the Western Athletic Conference, a league the Broncos have dominated for a decade in football, the Mountain West Conference confirmed with a statement Friday.

This is a huge win for both Boise State and the Mountain West, and I'll explain why. For Boise, this represents competition. No more eight-week stretches with irrelevant games against San Jose State, Hawaii and Louisiana Tech, games Boise can win by four touchdowns with nobody outside the state of Idaho giving the slightest crap. There will suddenly be meaningful matchups with Utah, BYU and TCU (assuming those schools are still there when the dust settles), which will give Boise the legitimacy it can't get in a conference full of third-tier schools. An undefeated season by a preseason top-10 team in the new-and-improved Mountain West might actually be enough to garner BCS title game consideration.

As for the Mountain West, there's a very simple, very obvious reason to bring in Boise State: an automatic BCS bid. The BCS determines its autobids using a rolling three-year formula, and when Boise's three-year record is added to the already-close-to-enough performances of Utah, BYU and TCU, there's a good chance the MWC will qualify for an autobid and all the money that comes with it. The whole BCS system could change once all this expansion mania is complete, but as things stand now, the Mountain West will be as good as the Big East.

And this probably won't be the last move by the Mountain West. Boise was actually expected to be invited last week -- the conference just held off because everybody wanted to wait and see what would happen with the Big 12. Unless Texas pulls a shocker and decides to stay put (which a few teams have to be desperately hoping for at this point), there will be some quality leftovers in the refrigerator. Kansas? Kansas State? Baylor? Iowa State? The Mountain West will have its pick of some/all of those teams. None of them really move the needle nationally in football, but the Kansas schools are good from time to time and basketball would get a MASSIVE boost. The conference would suddenly be relevant in both major sports.

Like everyone else, the MWC now just has to wait for the Big 12 fallout to see where it goes next. It could end up staying at 10 teams or it could end up with as many as 16. But even if the Big 12 stays intact, the Mountain West will be a lot stronger coming out of expansion than it was going in.