SEC, Big XII Conferences Shake Up College Athletic Map

(2012 SEC/Big XII footprint map: @Ranger222)

Updated 11-9-11 (to reflect still-evolving changes to the college football landscape caused by the Penn State scandal):

Over the past two years, as NCAA conference realignment-mania has taken over the sports blogosphere (and has made celebrities out of some old Drive and Dish friends), people have asked us for our thoughts on on the subject.

To date, we've remained largely silent.

That's primarily because we haven't been privy to any legitimate inside information ⁩⁩⁨(though we wouldn't have revealed inside information even if we'd had it), and because, aside from our longstanding opinion that the Big Ten should pursue the University of Texas and the University of Notre Dame (neither of which, it would now appear, will ever join the Big Ten), we haven't had a dog in this fight, as the cliche goes.

Thus, we've watched the conference realignment feeding frenzy from the sidelines -- as more or less disinterested parties.

Our absence from the realignment-mania scene shouldn't be mistaken for total disinterest in the topic though. We were, in fact, paying attention throughout the last year as the college sports world witnessed several big name schools abandon their historic conference affiliations and jump to new conference homes.

Utah ditched the Mountain West the minute that the Pac-10 came calling.

Then Colorado and Nebraska -- purportedly upset over the degree to which Texas had long exerted its influence over Big XII headquarters -- said "see-ya" to the Big XII and bounced to the Pac-10 and Big Ten, respectively.

Finally, after a year of grumbling about their burnt orange-clad big brothers in Austin, Texas A&M left the Longhorns and the Big XII in the rear view mirror and joined the Southeastern Conference (SEC).

Drive and Dish didn't say anything about those shufflings of the deck when they occurred, but we thought they were all solid, if not Earth-shattering moves.

Utah and Colorado are decent additions to the Pac-10, but they won't alter the balance of power in that league any time soon. Their additions did, however, allow the California-heavy conference to snag two schools in western, but non-West Coast states (to go along with longtime inland Pac-10 members Arizona and Arizona State). The Pac-10 has now repositioned itself as a "western" conference, rather than as the almost exclusively West Coast-oriented conference that it used to be.

Of course, it probably goes without saying football drives conference realignment. Drive and Dish is a basketball blog, but college basketball doesn't pay the bills. College football, however, does.

Our take on conference alignment to date:

SEC

Texas A&M is likely to find out that it's not easy to win football games in the SEC, but the Aggies should at least find their new conference to be a decent cultural fit.

Though the SEC's recent dominance of the college football landscape has resulted in its becoming the de facto center of the collegiate gridiron universe, the league's identity remains so firmly-rooted in its regional character that it's difficult to imagine it becoming home to a school from outside the traditional Deep South. But Texas A&M seems to make sense for the SEC in ways that some other rumored (and previously rumored) targets of SEC expansion don't (yes, that would be you West Virginia and Missouri). First, A&M is a very traditional southern school with a strong military history. And while Texas may be a southwestern state (rather than part of the Deep South, or of the SEC's namesake, the southeast), Texas A&M's Bryan/College Station, TX, campus is in East Texas -- and East Texas is more culturally "Southern" than most other parts of the Lone Star State.

Perhaps unbeknownst to most northerners, there's a fairly wide cultural gulf between Texas and the Deep South. So it's possible that Texas A&M won't be immediately welcomed as a full-fledged SEC "brother." But the SEC wanted to gain better access to the state of Texas' television markets and football recruiting circles, so the prospect of adding a school from Texas was very attractive. And the Aggies should fit in with the tradition-rich SEC better than other, less culturally Southern, Texas schools would (like say, UT or Texas Tech). Over time, the SEC should eventually warm to their new conference rivals from Texas. But whatever hurdles the Aggies face in getting acclimated to life in the SEC, this much is certain: with the the SEC now widely recognized as the preeminent conference in college football, A&M alumni and students are very gung-ho about moving there.

It must be noted though, that in recent years, Texas A&M football has struggled to remain relevant in the Big XII. So next year's move to the SEC could very well prove to be a rude awakening for the Aggies.

Big Ten

Our take was mixed when it was announced that Nebraska would join the Big Ten.

At first, we weren't especially impressed with the move. We were well aware of Nebraska's first-rate football tradition, of course. But since we'd been under the impression that the raison d'etre for Big Ten expansion was to add large television markets to enhance the Big Ten Network's TV footprint, we were a bit surprised that the Big Ten chose a school that failed to deliver a large television market.

There's no doubt that Nebraska has some of the most passionate, devoted fans in all of college football (and some of the most knowledgeable fans too!). The problem is, in a state that has fewer than 2 million residents, there aren't that many of them.

But the more time we spent thinking about Nebraska's pending membership in the Big Ten, the more we started to like it.

Eventually, we came to really like it.

A lot.

And now we're having second thoughts (or would that be third thoughts?).

Nebraska is a historic football power with a strong football brand that commands nationwide recognition. We've heard Big Ten fans complain that the University of Nebraska doesn't have the academic prestige that the other Big Ten schools have. And we know that its addition makes it the only Big Ten member institution that doesn't belong to the prestigious Association of American Universities (AAU). What's more, as noted above, we're well aware that the state of Nebraska -- a Midwestern plains state with a mere 1.7 million residents -- doesn't deliver a large television market, or allow the Big Ten to stake out a foothold in a new region.

But Nebraska is a decent school, and its addition gives the conference a football power to bookend its westernmost territories (as football power Penn State bookends its easternmost territories). Nebraska's addition to the Big Ten will provide the Iowa Hawkeyes with a much needed natural in-conference rival (the states of Nebraska and Iowa are very similar in terms of culture, geography and population). Michigan has natural rivals in Ohio State and Michigan State; Indiana has a natural rival in Purdue; Wisconsin has a natural rival in Minnesota; and Illinois has a natural rival in Northwestern.

Many sports writers and bloggers are fond of equating college football to chess (or at least fond of borrowing chess terminology). Accordingly, elite college football programs are often referred to as football "kings." By those terms, Nebraska would certainly have to be considered a college football "king." When taken with the Big Ten's big three traditional football powers -- Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State (or at least Penn State prior to the Jerry Sandusky child molestation scandal and its attendant fallout) -- the Cornhuskers' addition gives the Big Ten an enviable four football "kings" (assuming, of course, that Penn St. football eventually rises from its Sandusky-induced ashes).

But now comes the part about those second thoughts (or third thoughts, as it were): In theory, having four football "kings" should put the Big Ten in position to battle the SEC for college football preeminence for years to come. In reality, however, Nebraska's addition to the Big Ten will probably only make it tougher for teams to run the table in Big Ten conference play. And that will be tough for the Big Ten, since running the table is about the only thing a non SEC team can do to get to the BCS championship game.

The Southeast Conference is widely seen as the best conference in college football. Most of the recent BCS champions have come from that league. But the SEC is top-heavy. There are always a few elite programs on the top of the SEC (which are, in fact, better than, teams from other conferences), but there's usually a significant drop off after that.

By contrast, the Big Ten has become a middle-heavy league. In a typical year, Ohio State, Michigan and either Penn State or Wisconsin are in the BCS picture, but just below them, the league is packed with a second tier of good-but-not-great teams that specialize in knocking the "kings" off their respective perches (and yes, we're aware that the post-scandal Ohio State isn't up to par this year). In short, Big Ten teams beat up on themselves.

That makes it difficult for any Big Ten team to emerge from conference play unscathed and in contention for a national championship (since, as noted, being undefeated has all but become a prerequisite for being selected to play in the BCS championship game).

SEC teams often beat up on each other too, but the national sports media sees that as evidence of the SEC's superiority. If a solid, but middle-of-the-pack Big Ten team's ability to knock off an Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan or Wisconsin on any given Saturday proves the Big Ten's elite programs to be "pager tigers," then a middle-of-the-pack SEC team's occasional upset of an Alabama, Georgia, Florida or LSU proves that the SEC is so superior that even the mediocre SEC teams can beat anybody in the country!

So while the Big Ten looks stronger on paper now that Nebraska is on board, there's a strong likelihood that in years to come, the Big Ten will be a meat grinder that chews up its elite teams and spits them out with BCS-eliminating losses on their records. The Big Ten is more interesting with Nebraska, but the SEC will continue to be seen as the premier conference in college football.

Big XII

Now that the Big XII has announced the addition of West Virginia to fill the expected vacancy that Missouri will leave if/when, as rumored, it bolts the Big XII for the Southeastern Conference (SEC), the Big XII has lost its geographic contiguity.

When the old Southwest Conference folded in 1995, it made sense for Texas, Texas A&M, Baylor and Texas Tech to join the old Big 8 schools to form the Big XII. Rivalries between the Texas schools and Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Nebraska and Missouri seemed like naturals.

But now that Nebraska, Colorado, Texas A&M and (probably) Missouri have fled for greener pastures, the conference is scrambling to remain viable. So it grabbed the best available football school, regardless of geography, tradition or overall fit.

West Virginia wisely jumped off the sinking ship that was the Big East. But the Mountaineers seem like a haphazard addition to the Big XII.

If as rumored, Louisville follows the lead of its former Big East rival West Virginia and joins the Big XII, the former Great Plains-centered conference will only become that much more jumbled.

In some instances, it makes sense for conferences to expand beyond their traditional geographic footprints. But such expansion is usually done with the acquisition of new television markets and population bases in mind. Thus, adding Boston College and Miami made financial sense for the ACC. However, even though West Virginia and Louisville are good football programs, adding them won't bring coveted big new TV markets or metropolitan areas to the Big XII (Louisville is a decent-sized city, it's still considered a small TV market).

West Virginia and Louisville are solid football programs that don't want to be left homeless if/once the Big East folds. So they're available for a Big XII that's desperately looking to rebound from the breakup of longtime relationships with Nebraska, Texas A&M, Colorado and Missouri.

Thank you Texas Longhorns.

The Big XII may live on, but they won't be fooling anybody.

Again, thank you Texas Longhorns.

West Virginia Upsets Duke

By Trashtalk Superstar

Immediately after selecting Duke to beat West Virginia in my NCAA Tournament bracket, I started to wish that I'd picked West Virginia instead. I'd waffled a bit before I picked Duke because I felt certain that West Virginia could (and maybe should) beat the Blue Devils.

But ultimately, I decided that West Virginia had been too inconsistent this year for me to feel especially confident about picking them over Duke. Then I made a major error: I started to project how West Virginia would match up against Duke, position by position. I thought that West Virginia was as good as, or better than Duke at every position except for at the wing. I concluded that Duke's combination of Gerald Henderson and DeMarcus Nelson would be hard for West Virginia to defend, and that the game would likely turn on Duke's advantage in that particular matchup.

On Saturday, West Virginia upset Duke 73-67, and earned a trip to next week's Sweet 16.

DeMarcus Nelson was held to 6 points.

Now I really I wish that I'd just gone ahead and picked West Virginia. I wanted to, but I let myself over think my decision.

Look, for the last two or three years years it's been my contention that Duke has been vastly overrated.

Before last year's NCAA Tournament field was announced, I questioned whether Duke even deserved an NCAA Tournament bid, and I suggested that they probably really belonged in the N.I.T. And I wasn't exactly shocked when Virginia Commonwealth knocked Duke out of the Tournament in the first round.

But I believe that many of the world's ills are directly attributable to mankind's seemingly insatiable thirst for ego-gratification: particularly the kind of ego-gratification that one gets from saying,"I told you so," "I was right and you were wrong," etc. And besides, I didn't think that Duke's loss to VCU was that big of a surprise. So I refrained from commenting on Duke's early exit from the 2007 NCAA Tournament on Drive and Dish. I did, however, take note of ESPN college basketball analyst Dick Vitale's preposterous explanation of Duke's first round Tournament collapse last year . Furthermore, in that archived Drive and Dish post, I cast my cynical eye on what I considered to be overly optimistic projections of a Duke return to glory in 2008. I asserted that I'd noticed the development a trend wherein ESPN college basketball analysts would attempt to minimize poor NCAA Tournament showings by Duke with the promise of an immediate return to dominance for the Blue Devils in the upcoming season (and NCAA Tournament), courtesy of yet another stellar incoming Duke recruiting class:

"Not to worry, Dukies. Vitale jubilantly pointed to Duke's outstanding recruiting class for 2007. He told the Sports Center audience that the Devils will get right back to kickin' ass and takin' names in '08. Help is on the way! Duke has some serious studs coming in! The Dukies will be back at the top next year, baby!

Sound familiar? It should. Again, Vitale said exactly the same thing last year. Hey, how could Mike Krzyzewski be expected win Tournament games with overachievers like (Shelden) Williams and (J.J.) Redick? Once Duke replaced that dead weight with incoming super freshmen such as Gerald Henderson and Jon Scheyer, Vitale pleaded, they would be right back on top of college basketball in '07. Baby!"

And I questioned the logic by which Vitale (and other analysts) arrived at the conclusion that Duke was destined for greatness in 2008:

"Vitale would have college basketball fans believe that some scrawny white (kid) named Kyle Singler is going to step on campus next year, and -as a skinny, goofy looking freshman- lead Duke back to the promised land. Naw, Dickie V, you're not putting undue pressure on a kid who's still in high school. Kyle Singler already has enough to stress about: graduation, whom to take to Prom, what to do after Prom, etc. Now he's got to figure out how to single-handedly lead Duke back to the Final Four next year.

Just as Jon Scheyer and Gerald Henderson were going to lead Duke back to the Final Four - as skinny freshmen- this year.

Just as Greg Paulus was supposed to do -as a skinny freshman- last year."

It has been my contention that over the last three years, the national sports media has over-hyped and overrated Duke (and, to a lesser degree, the entire Atlantic Coast Conference). And ESPN has done so, in large part, because of programming considerations.

Duke has truly become college basketball's equivalent of Notre Dame football.

Consider the fact that just as every Notre Dame football game is broadcast to a national television audience, so too is every Duke basketball game. No other college basketball program can claim that distinction. It doesn't matter whether Duke plays an opponent that would naturally generate a large television audience -- such as when they play their arch-rival, North Carolina (in yet another "battle of the century," or "game for the ages") -- or whether Duke plays an early season patsy such as Florida A&M or Cornell. Every single Duke game is nationally televised.

And most of those games are broadcast on ESPN. Duke basketball has all but become the centerpiece of ESPN's college basketball programming. Therefore, it's in ESPN's best interest to have Dick Vitale and their other college basketball analysts constantly doing their best to hype up and, hopefully, generate interest in Duke basketball.

Another way in which Duke basketball mirrors Notre Dame football is in the way Duke basketball generates extreme emotional responses from sports fans. Just like Notre Dame, plenty of folks love Duke and everything that Duke basketball purports to represent, but a hell of a lot more people absolutely DESPISE Duke, and loathe everything that they perceive Duke basketball to represent.

Although contributing Drive and Dish basketball commentator Mark Buckets will, undoubtedly, balk at the following characterization, Duke basketball (and, for that matter, Duke University) is widely perceived as being arrogant.

Duke is college basketball's "blue blood" program du jour. And unlike college programs that have previously been (and occasionally still are) referred to as "college basketball blue bloods" (Kentucky, Kansas, UCLA, Indiana, North Carolina), Duke's basketball program represents an institution (Duke University) which is an extremely selective, highly reputable, ungodly expensive private university that boasts an amazing $6 billion dollar endowment.

What's more, the nutty Duke students who camp outside Cameron Indoor Stadium for weeks before each Duke game, paint their faces and bodies blue, pack Cameron's 9,000 (or so) seats to the rafters, boisterously bop up and down while chanting, screaming and taunting, and mercilessly ridicule opposing teams' players (often with predictions of those players' pending status as future professional subordinates/flunkees of said Cameron Crazies) do nothing to minimize the public's widespread perception of Duke as an elitist institution, comprised of arrogant little prick students who come from wealthy, privileged Northeastern families.

It's easy to understand why lots of people don't like Duke. Duke is an easy target. And it doesn't help that Duke's coach, Mike Krzyzewski, often comes across as aloof and arrogant himself.

There's just no way around it: Duke basketball generates passion. People either love Duke or they hate Duke. There's really very little in-between. Just as in the case of Notre Dame football.

So ESPN's constant promotion of Duke should be seen as a smart move. Duke's basketball program is different from any other program in the college basketball. Duke basketball equates to drama. For ESPN, programming and promoting Duke hoops is a no brainer. It's kind of like their version of having a soap opera or reality show.

Duke basketball games have esentially become ESPN's answer to American Idol and Dancing With the Stars. Duke basketball broadcasts provide drama, intrigue and live/unscripted competition.

And you either root for Duke or you root against them. But one thing you aren't is apathetic.

In my opinion, that's why ESPN and the national media hype Duke up so much. It has everything to do with drama and with television programming.

So guys like Dick Vitale talk about Duke until the cows come home.

But, in the end, it results in Duke being perpetually overrated (although that, in no way, should detract from the actual success -- 3 National Championships, multiple Final Four appearances -- that the Duke basketball program has had over the past 25 years).

Before filling out my NCAA brackets, I really thought that West Virginia had a good chance of beating Duke. And before the season started, I thought that Duke was overrated and that their youth and inexperience (along with their weaknesses at point guard and in the post) would prevent them from being an elite team and from making a deep run in hte 2008 NCAA Tournament.

But as the season went along (and especially after Duke went into the Dean Smith Center and beat North Carolina in February), I began to let the chatter affect my better judgment. That's why I ultimately picked Duke over West Virginia.

I won't be fooled again.

Georgetown: Early Favorite for Final Four

In tonight's Big East v. SEC showdown, Georgetown beat Alabama and West Virginia (in their first year under new coach Bob Huggins) annihilated Auburn.

The West Virginia v. Auburn game was never in doubt. West Virginia blew the Tigers out from the opening tip off.

Alabama gave Georgetown trouble for most of the game, but couldn't hang at the end.

Why are these games relevant? Two reasons:

1.) - Because three players looked like sure fire NBA prospects.

Georgetown center Roy Hibbert, Alabama power forward Richard Hendrix and West Virginia forward Joe Alexander will all be NBA players.

Roy Hibbert returned to Georgetown after toying with the NBA draft over the summer. He made the right decision by going back to school. Hibbert is a giant: he's 7'2," with a very wide body, despite the fact that he's dropped a significant amount of weight in the last two years. The weight loss has allowed Hibbert to show surprising mobility and agility for a guy who is - even with the weight loss - such a mountain of a man. Despite his mass, Hibbert plays a finesse game: in order to maximize his effectiveness at the next level, he'll need to learn how to better utilize his size (not just his height) to his advantage. Hibbert needs to power up to the rim when he has the ball. He needs to be more aggressive on offense. But he has good hands, and has outstanding basketball instincts.

Roy Hibbert looks like an NBA lottery pick. His game isn't pretty, and he's not exactly a force under the basket. But Roy Hibbert will be a nice center at the next level. And he's only 20 years old. This kid has come a long way in a short time (the massive weight loss, the improved athleticism, the improved court sense, etc.). He's still only starting to scratch the surface of what he can be. While I don't expect him to be a perennial NBA all star, I think he'll be a good NBA center (especially if he goes to a team that has a lot of other pieces). Ultimately, I see him being similar to Brendan Haywood at the next level.

Alabama's Richard Hendrix is a big, strong, athletic power forward with a great feel for the game. He has the build and the skills of the prototypical NBA power forward. He's not a new school Kevin Garnett/Dirk Nowitzki type slashing and perimeter shooting power forward. He's an old school, back to the basket, rebounding tough power forward. And he's for real.

Hendrix's game is very polished. He defends and rebounds well. He uses his body and his athleticism well. And he's got all the requisite offensive skills - he scores in the low post, he has a nice 10-15 foot jump shot, he has a good understanding of the game, he passes well and he makes his free throws. This guy is no project. He should be able to contribute the minute he sets foot on an NBA floor.

Finally, West Virginia's Joe Alexander has, seemingly, come from nowhere to establish himself as one of the best college players in the country -- and as a legitimate NBA prospect. This guy was a tall, skinny, frail forward last year. Bob Huggins has made him gain weight and get tougher. He has.

Alexander is an extremely explosive leaper (on one alley oop dunk, his head was parallel with the rim). He has nice lateral quickness and down court speed. This guy is just an effortless athlete (although he doesn't look like he's really playing hard, he goes past you or jumps over you).

Joe Alexander plays power forward, but he's a totally finesse player. He's no back to the basket guy -- he catches the ball and faces up to the basket. Alexander is most comfortable taking his man off the dribble. He either gets to the rim, or (more often) takes a couple dribbles and stops for a mid range jumper or a turnaround. This guy plays like a smaller, more athletic Dirk Nowitzki (I'm not saying that he's in the same stratosphere as Dirk, but he plays with a similar style). He'll probably never be a true power forward, but he'll - no doubt - get his run at the next level. Expect him to be compared to former NBA great Tom Chambers - athletic, high flying white big guys almost always are (probably because they come along so infrequently).

As for the second reason tonight's games were relevant:

2.) - Georgetown.

After watching Georgetown, I'm convinced that they're good enough to make a return trip to the Final Four. They lost forward Jeff Green to the NBA, but they don't look like they've skipped a beat. Their guards are all solid: they make smart plays, handle pressure defense well, they don't turn the ball over, they have the ability penetrate and get into the lane and they nail their perimeter shots. Georgetown's front line, led by Hibbert, is also top notch.

This team has all the pieces. I still don't think they'll win the national championship, but they have the look of a Final Four team for sure. And yeah, it's early ... but Georgetown looks like they're for real.

Huggins Jilts Kansas State, Heads to West Virginia

After just one season as the men's basketball coach at Kansas State, Bob Huggins will become the new coach at West Virginia.

Drive and Dish could follow the pack and say that Huggins' move shows a lack of class on his part. And, yeah, this move (as with just about every move Huggins has ever made) does exhibit a lack of class. But c'mon. Kansas State hired Bob Huggins. Huggins was jobless because Cincinnati had finally seen enough of his act (he had a DUI before the start of the 2005/06 season, his program had a zero percent graduation rate, his program was viewed-correctly-as a rogue program and his players were perceived as thugs). Kansas State knew what they were getting when they hired him. They didn't care about integrity. They shouldn't be surprised.

West Virginia Wins NIT, But Can't Spell Own Name

Thursday night, West Virginia won the N.I.T. After their victory, the team received their championship tee shirts. West Virginia was misspelled on the tees.

This is almost too good. The state of West Virginia is one of the poorest states in the nation and continually ranks near the bottom in its quality of public education. Most people think of West Virginians as a bunch of inbred, toothless hillbillies.

So when the state's flagship university wins a second-tier championship and has its name misspelled (West Virgina) on the championship commemorative tees...it's pretty damn funny.

I can already envision some of the lame punchlines people might use:

• Maybe West Virginia couldn't afford that last "i."
• Senator Robert Byrd, D-WV, has been bringing all the pork-barrel spending to West Virginia for fifty years, and he couldn't pop for an extra vowel?
• Glad to see that the moonshine business is still thriving in West Virginia.
  
• West Virgina? Shouldn't it be "West Virgin-ie," like the locals pronounce it?
• etc...

West Virginia deserves better. They've got a solid basketball tradition. They have passionate fans. They play in the conference, the Big East, that receives the most media attention.

This is embarrassing for the University West Virginia, the state of West Virginia, the NIT and the NCAA.