The Demise of the Regional Conference

If you've turned on ESPN in the last 24 hours, you've heard the big news: Colorado will be leaving the Big 12 to join the Pac-10, and Nebraska is headed off to the Big 10. Rumors suggest that Texas, Texas Tech, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State may also be on the way out, possibly all also over to the Pac-10 (soon to be known the "Pac-16"!?!). Making a play on Notre Dame (in addition to picking up Nebraska), the Big 10 may also soon compete as a "super-conference," the kind that used to be unheard of except for, you know, the Big 12.

While it's true that Arizona and Arizona State are located in a state that does not sit on the Pacific Coast, there was still undoubtedly a regional coherence to the Pac-10. Same can be said for the Big 10 and Big 12, the Big East and SEC. But with the departure of Colorado signed in ink, Nebraska not far behind, and the Texas schools smelling blood (a.k.a. big media market money) in the water, the Big 12 seems on its last legs. The Big 10 may still make some claims to being a regional conference, but a Pac-16 including Texas and Oklahoma can make no such assertion. Throw in there the potential that Notre Dame basketball may go along with the ride for Notre Dame football to join the Big 10, and you see the death of the Big East as well.

At the end of the day, will the only regional conference left be the SEC? Is it time to abandon this conference nonsense altogether and just create four regional super-conferences once and for all: Pac-16, Big 16, ACC, and SEC (and possibly abandon the NCAA in the process)? And even though Football is King, what does this mean for basketball powerhouses outside of the new super-conferences (especially those in the dying Big 12 and Big East, like Kansas, KState, and Gtown)?

Lots of questions, but no clear answers yet for how this will all settle at the end of the day.

Say it Ain't So Jim Delany!

In an interview on Wednesday with USA Today, Big Ten Conference Commissioner Jim Delany told the newspaper that he thought expansion of the NCAA Tournament to 96 teams was "probable."   An expanded bracket would mean 31 additional tournament games and lots and lots of money for the NCAA and the broadcast network(s) that secures the rights to broadcast the larger tournament.

Is expansion good?  Me, I'm pretty indifferent.  I like the tournament the way it is now, but at the same time, I wouldn't mind more action, excitement, and heartache.  I do worry, however, that rather than allowing more "Mid-Majors" to battle with the big boys, expansion will just give mediocre teams in power conferences more of an opportunity to blow-up our brackets.  (Also, I would kinda miss the NIT... GO MSG!)