ESPN College Football

Earlier today, we looked at the pay for athletic directors around the league, but what about the men up top?

USA Today researched and released the pay for each conference commissioner, and former Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe earned $1.7 million in 2010 after receiving a 70 percent raise.

He was relieved of his duties in fall 2011.

Here's how he ranked among his peers:

• Larry Scott, Pac-12: $1.9 million
• Jim Delany, Big Ten: $1.8 million
• Beebe: $1.7 million
• John Swofford, ACC: $1.5 million
• Mike Slive, SEC: $1 million
• John Marinatto, Big East: $600,000

The Big 12 has since moved on from Beebe, and no salary information was available for interim commissioner Chuck Neinas.

In USA Today's survey of athletic director salaries, new commissioner Bob Bowlsby's salary was unavailable, because Stanford is a private institution.

Either way, I'd expect the first-time commissioner to easily clear a seven-digit salary in his new gig.

For reference, Texas AD DeLoss Dodds made just under 1.1 million last year. Not exactly helping that whole "Texas runs the Big 12" perception if he makes more than the Big 12 commish, no?

The days of the Rose Bowl being the bowl of bowls could soon be coming to an end now that the SEC and the Big 12 have agreed on a five-year bowl partnership.

The new deal, announced Friday, will have the champions of the Big 12 and SEC meet in a New Year's Day bowl game annually beginning with the 2014 season. So while it won’t have the tradition of the Rose Bowl, it’ll have the viewers and it’ll have the popularity.

We’re seeing more and more how power is truly the most important component in college football, and this is a great example. Soon, we’ll have the two best BCS conferences going at it in their own special bowl competing with the beloved Rose Bowl.

We’re joined on the SEC blog by Big 12 blogger David Ubben to get his thoughts on what this means for the Big 12. We’re gentlemen down here in SEC country, so we’ll let him go first:

David Ubben: Rose Bowl, we love you. Not as much as Jim Delany does, but I'm not sure anyone can stake that claim. Anyway, it's time to face an unfortunate truth: You've been one-upped. The unnamed, unplaced bowl partnership between the Big 12 and SEC won't have the same level of tradition, but it will feature better teams. That's a powerful draw.
The BCS has played 14 national title games since its birth. The Big 12 or SEC have participated in 12 of them. Teams from the league have met in the game twice.

Now, they'll have another big stage to showcase their top teams. If a Big 12 or SEC champion is in the four-team playoff that will likely begin in the 2014 season, the next-best team will fill their place in the annual game. Deciding who plays in that game is up to each conference. The nation's two best conferences will get a much-needed opportunity to face one another on the field and test the hotly debated offense vs. defense theories on the field annually. The nation's college football fans were robbed of that when Oklahoma State was squeezed out of the national title game for SEC West second-place finisher Alabama. This year, the SEC and Big 12 only play once, when eight-win Texas travels to face two-win Ole Miss in September. Not exactly must-see TV.

This will be.

It assures the Big 12 a place at the adults' table of college football, further extending the distance between college football's top four leagues -- the SEC, Big 12, Pac-12 and Big Ten, in that order -- and the ACC and Big East. The ACC and Big East have the Orange Bowl, but any game like the SEC and Big 12 put together will pale in comparison when it comes to TV ratings and more importantly, TV money.

Only a few months ago, the Big 12 had eight teams, with half the league considering a move to the Pac-12 and the conference on life support. Things are looking very different now. It's about to sign a giant television deal, likely extending the grant of rights into the next decade and assuring stability at least through then, and probably beyond.

Tired of getting stuck playing Boise State and UConn in everything to lose, nothing to gain BCS bowl matchups? Seven-time Big 12 champion Oklahoma won't have to worry about that anymore, and even if the Sooners are in the forthcoming national championship playoff, the next-best Big 12 team will have a quality opponent to prove itself against.

Another plus for the Big 12? The Cotton Bowl's odds of getting into the BCS as it stood were minimal. Now? It's still in flux, but does anyone want to bet against Jerry Jones and his wallet to get this game in his Dallas palace at some point? That's a big game in the Big 12 footprint, something that's never happened on the BCS bowl stage.

How will this affect Florida State, too? News has surely reached Tallahassee by now, and the Florida State spear-toting brass have to be wondering how much this factors into their wandering eye toward the Big 12. Is the ACC the place to be?

We'll find out soon, but on Jan. 1, 2015, there will be only one place to be.

This game.

Edward Aschoff: I couldn’t agree more with pretty much everything you said. There’s no question that both of these leagues have dominated the BCS since its first year in 1998. The conferences have been left out of the national championship just twice in the last 14 years and the SEC has participated in -- and won -- eight. The Big 12 has won two of its seven appearances.

SEC commissioner Mike Slive has just about everything he wants in his conference, but he hasn’t had the Rose Bowl. Sure, all those national championship trophies are nice, but an annual game like the Rose Bowl commands respect. The game that the Big Ten and Pac-12 covet so much, and is watched by millions annually, will now get a major run for its money. While they’ll be played in different time slots, there’s no question that this will turn into the ultimate popularity contest. If you could sense that Big Ten-SEC tension before, just wait. Now, the SEC will be looking down on the Big Ten and picking at the game it holds so dear. Don’t think that didn’t cross the commissioner’s mind when he was thinking about this deal.

The SEC has truly been front and center in the college football world for the past six years with its 6-0 record in BCS championships, and now it will pursue a game it thinks can have the gusto of the Rose. This is a great opportunity for the SEC to build another fine tradition for the country’s top college football conference. And fans/the media want to see more of these matchups. For the most part, we're all deprived of them during the regular season, so here's a chance for us to win something as well. These two conferences need to play more. The best should always play the best, and as David said, we can finally settle the whole offense-defense debate.

This also means that more SEC teams have the chance to play in a primetime, marquee matchup in January. If this had been in place last season, Arkansas, which certainly had a BCS-caliber team, would have played in a BCS-like bowl, since Alabama and LSU met in the title game. The Cotton Bowl got the matchup this game would have received, but it would have been on a much grander scale and much more attention would have been paid to it. Oh, and much more money would have come out of it.

It would likely help the SEC this year too, as there could be as many as five teams jockeying for BCS position. Imagine if the four-team playoff took place this season? You might have two more SEC teams fighting for a chance at a national championship, meaning this game would give No. 3 a chance strut its stuff in front of its own grand audience.

There’s no question that with a four-team playoff, the SEC will have more opportunities to put teams in the national championship, continuing its dominance. Now, Slive has helped to ensure that a high-caliber team left out of the championship hunt will still play in a game that will command the type of attention that comes with a BCS bowl.

Congratulations to Kirk Bohls and Berry Tramel, who were both honored by the National Sportscasters and Sportswriters Association as the sportswriters of the year in Texas and Oklahoma, respectively.

• The championship recipe for Texas? Look at Alabama to find it, writes Kirk Bohls of the Austin American-Statesman.
• Want to go to a TCU game? It'll cost you more this year, but the prices are still the cheapest in the Big 12, reports Stefan Stevenson of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.
• Berry Tramel of The Oklahoman weighs in on how OSU would matchup against LSU. He also pleads for change and points out the not so obvious: College football's biggest problem is its regular season.
• There are still 50 or 60 plans on the table, but a four-team playoff could be coming. Jim Delany's not standing in the way of this one.
• Change could be brought about from "SEC fatigue," writes George Schroeder of SI.com.
• West Virginia coach Dana Holgorsen is targeting an assistant at his old stomping ground at Oklahoma State, Joe DeForest.
• Matt Tait of the Lawrence Journal-World weighs in on why Kansas' defensive coordinator search is taking so long. The Jayhawks did just swipe the DC from North Texas, though.
• Texas' former offensive line coach may be headed to Penn State.
• Columbia, Missouri, is looking to enhance its downtown culture during gameday as it joins the SEC, reports Benjamin Nadler of the Columbia Missourian.
• Former Kansas State coach Vince Gibson died late on Monday.
• Texas A&M quarterback Ryan Tannehill reportedly injured his foot and will miss the Senior Bowl.
• Picking the next Big 12 champ? It's anyone's guess, writes Jimmy Burch of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

The Longhorn Network doesn't launch until Aug. 26, but it's already been the subject of plenty of discussion and prompted the league's athletic directors to meet last week in Dallas in the midst of more realignment rumors and problems that had to be solved before the launch.

"Oh, you know, just another easy summer," Beebe said with a laugh to begin a recent interview with ESPN.com. "I need a summer where I can be bored for once."

He didn't get it in 2010, when the Big 12 lost a pair of teams.

This one wasn't easy either, but Beebe took some time to talk about the Longhorn Network, Texas, Texas A&M's future in the Big 12, and the league's possible new network.

We’ve seen commissioners take a much bigger role in this world of expansion and realignment, but how has that changed the jobs you, [Big Ten commissioner] Jim Delany and [SEC commissioner] Mike Slive and the rest of you do compared to your predecessors?

Dan Beebe: I think the intensity is ratcheted up enormously. It’s already more intense, and there’s a greater amount of intensity that’s been created between the high-resource conferences and the lower-resource conferences. For the commissioners’ roles themselves, and within the BCS-level conferences, it’s ratcheted up as well.

How much longer do you think we’ll be talking about expansion and realignment in college sports in general?

DB: It’s happened for a while, for 20 to 22 years that I’ve been around. Certainly when it happens at this level, it makes a lot more news. I mean, I brought in five new members when I was in the Ohio Valley Conference, and then you’d have to look back at Penn State and Arkansas and South Carolina and some other movements that have gone on.

I think until we all kind of settle into our new television deals and we play, the Big Ten plays together with its 12 and the Pac-12 plays together and the Big East with its new configuration, until we go through a few years of that, this will always be something that people suspect will occur, and that’s a change in alignment.

What was it like for you to see this stuff bubble up again in recent weeks, a year after it looked like the Big 12 had kind of moved on?

DB: It’s disconcerting. Like I said at media days, we’re not going to get the benefit of the doubt by the media or the public until we go through a couple seasons probably playing each other and everybody gets to see what we’re talking about in terms of our stability and commitment to the future and what’s going on or what we’re about.

We had that athletic directors meeting the other day, and every single athletic director reiterated their commitment to the conference and the fact that they believe the best place for their institution is in this configuration of institutions.

How would you describe the discussions at the meeting last Monday?

DB: Frank. And respectful. But there certainly was -- and I encouraged it -- nobody I think held back from what their feelings were and what their position was.

Look, the one thing that hasn’t gotten out is, especially with the Longhorn Network, how considerate DeLoss Dodds and Texas has been about this. They have said, and it’s made several publications, that they did not want to do anything that was going to create a recruiting advantage or do anything that was going to harm the conference. And DeLoss came to the meetings with that kind of continued attitude about it.

So what was expressed that you would describe as frank?

DB: Well, that kind of sentiment. I don’t want to get into what goes back and forth while ideas are being formulated, because I think you need to have those things done in private, so it was just a matter of where everybody stood on certain issues and it was a good exchange.

Texas A&M has certainly been at the center of a lot of this, so what did they express to you and others in the meeting about their future in this league?

DB: That they’re very, strongly committed to the conference, just as Bill Byrne stated. They helped make sure it was going forward last summer and believe strongly that this is the place for the institution to be located.

How do you feel the Longhorn Network’s general existence affects the long-term stability of the league?

DB: Well, I think that all of our institutions in five years are going to have delivery systems, whether they be together or some together, some not. We’ve just seen the Pac-10 basically create that for their own members in what, six different networks and a seventh for the conference?

So, I think that’s the wave of the future. There’s going to be an appetite for fans in a local region to see the content in that region that may not be appealing for a wider region or even nationally, and all of our institutions are going to create some sort of delivery system.

The Longhorn Network is just the first one out of the gate. And whenever you have a first venture like that, there’s all sorts of questions and things that need to be ironed out. But I think all of [the other schools] will be there in five years.

(Read full post)

A pay raise from 2008 to 2009 pushed Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe's salary to just under $1 million, according to tax records acquired by the Associated Press.

Beebe was paid $661,000 in 2008, but received a raise to $997,000 for 2009.

Big 12 spokesman Bob Burda told the Associated Press that the raise was given by the conference's board of directors to put him on par with the rest of the BCS automatic qualifying leagues.

Here's what college football's other major conference commissioners made in 2009:

• Jim Delany, Big Ten: $1.6 million
• John Swofford, ACC, $1.1 million
• Mike Slive, SEC, $1 million
• Dan Beebe, Big 12, $997,000

The other two major conference commissioners were hired after the first half of 2009, but here's what they were paid for six months of compensation:

• Larry Scott, Pac-10/12, $735,000
• John Marinatto, Big East, $366,000

According to the outlet, "Those figures include base salary and benefits such as health insurance, as well as other forms of pay such as retirement and deferred compensation."

College football's other five leagues that don't receive automatic BCS bids all paid their commissioners less than $600,000.

Thanks again for all the questions. Enjoy your snowless weekends. I know I will. As for All-Star Saturday Night: Give me Chris Paul, Kevin Durant and Blake Griffin.

Jason in Austin, Texas, writes: Ubbs, I've been talking to some friends about new names for the Big 12, and I've heard one thrown around that I wanted to get your take on: The Ten. What do you think?

David Ubben: On first glance, I really like it. It's aggressive, and a little brash, which might rub a few people the wrong way, but a move like that might be what the Big 12 could use right now. A little administrative brashness has been missing for a while in this league. Dan Beebe sounds like he wants to position the league uniquely, and as the only 10-team conference left, that might be a pretty good way to do it.

The "big" problem with it is you still have the Big Ten. While "Big" may still be a qualifier, the mass perception would be The Ten vs. Big Ten. Not good. For that reason, when you look at the big picture, I don't think it would work well.

I'm on record as believing the Big 12 should keep its name, if only because A) I believe the brand is strong enough where a change would significantly hurt and B) there's no other good options. Maybe reason B could change, and "The Ten" is probably the best suggestion I've heard recently, but it's not better than the Big 12.

Anything lame like "The Heartland Conference" or something along those lines sounds like it belongs in NAIA.

---

Gary in Dallas writes: Did you really write that Texas Tech would contend for the national championship` in 2012? What in the heck makes you say that? Since when are the Red Raiders going to beat UT, OU, Mizzou, Oklahoma State and everyone else on their schedule in the same year?

DU: For the record, no. I was referring to the Big 12 title, which I do think Texas Tech will have a pretty good shot at winning in 2012. It'll be tough, sure. They won't be one of the favorites, but I don't consider them a team that has a great chance to win it this year. Next year, that may change. They can probably win 10-11 games. The question asked in the chat was kind of rambling, and those chats move pretty fast, but I would be very surprised if Texas Tech was in the national championship hunt as early as 2012.

---

Guy King in College Station writes: You list Ryan Tannehill with a 5-1 record as a starter. Tell me the game that he lost? Check your records.

DU: If I were a Texas A&M fan, I'd want to forget about the Cotton Bowl, too.

---

Bleedburntorange in Little Rock, Ark., writes: Being a Texas Longhorn fan I really enjoy your views and opinions. I can't help but notice that most of Longhorn nation, myself included, is expecting incoming freshman Malcolm Brown to breath some life into the Longhorns' rushing attack. How many touches do you see him getting and how many yards do you think he will get? Also do you see any specific players stepping up to help fix all the problems from last season?

DU: Well, it's obviously a little early for all that, and we haven't even seen Brown take the field yet. I'm not going to throw out a yardage figure, but my guess is he gets about 150-170 carries next year, and as he learns, starts to take a few more away from Fozzy Whittaker and Cody Johnson late in the season.

As for fixing the problems, it's not about one guy stepping up. They need everybody. You win in the Big 12 with offense. You become an elite Big 12 team with offense and good defense. The defense was OK last year, but the offense was a complete disaster. The offensive line didn't get it done. If that happens again, there's no point in worrying about what Malcolm Brown does. Garrett Gilbert had a historically bad year. And nobody consistently was a good target to throw to. Everybody has to be better.

---

Mike in Dallas asks: Is the Cyrus Gray/Christine Michael RB duo the best in college football next year?

DU: As long as Christine Michael can come back next fall and look like he did last year, I'd probably make that argument. He was playing fantasticly before he broke his leg. Against Arkansas and Oklahoma State, the two games I saw him really up close, he was running with a power that we didn't see from him as a freshman. And Gray obviously closed the season with an unbelievable run of seven 100-yard games against some great defenses (Nebraska, OU, LSU) that very well could carry into next year.

Also, people always want to ask, "Who'll start? Who'll get more carries?" Does it really matter? They're both going to get a lot. They're both good. Whoever is running it best at the time will probably get more at the time. That'll vary. Don't worry about the distribution, Aggies.

---

Ed in Chicago writes: It seems to me that the new ESPN deal with Texas essentially made the Longhorns an independent inside a conference. Do you think it made the Big 12 more likely to stay together since Texas is the kingpin and they have it both ways? Or do you think that jealousy will force other members to leave the horns shadow? It seems that Texas would be content to stay since it is a nice arrangement for them.

DU: I just don't believe it has as much of an effect on the Big 12's future as others do. Oklahoma is content to stay with Texas. Right now, with the television rights, money, scheduling and location, there's no question that Texas is happy in the Big 12 as it stands. Oklahoma would like much of the same. Texas A&M is the only other school that has the means to do anything about it, but all the decision-makers in College Station don't sound like they're seriously considering a move to the SEC this summer. They sound, for the most part, content in the Big 12.

The only other real option is if the Big Ten invited Missouri, an invitation which, in my opinion, Missouri would trip over itself to accept, but that "invitation" (yes, technically that's not how the Big Ten operates, but whatever. For the sake of simplicity, humor me here.) would require a sharp change of course from everything Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany has said of late. In short, they're not looking to expand past 12 teams. The only conference that might take the leap is the Pac-12, but without Texas as part of the package, a move to do so with just Texas Tech, Oklahoma State or Baylor isn't quite as appealing, and like I said before, Oklahoma is staying with Texas.

---

Jeff in San Diego writes: David, Love the blog. Can you tell me how the Longhorns are in the pre-season Top 25 that ESPN put out. Where is all the love coming from? Mack replaced his entire staff and they have to teach the kids an entirely new offense and defense. Aren't expectations a little too high?

DU: Well, it's the beauty of polls. There's plenty of room for disagreement. Like I've said all offseason, Texas won't be sniffing any top 25 poll I vote in until they give me reason -- on the field -- to include them. Maybe it'll happen. Maybe it won't. But I'm waiting until mid-September at the earliest to even consider them. I don't care what anyone says/writes/does in the spring or fall camp. Show me in a game.

---

Jim Calhoun in Claflin, Kan,. writes: What can KSU do to improve their defense? They have to improve greatly to be able to compete in the round robin Big XII.

DU: The biggest problem I saw for Kansas State last year was a severe, severe lack of speed. Obviously, the great teams and defenses have it, but K-State was arguably the slowest defense in the Big 12 last year. That's not going to be good for any scheme, so don't hang it all on the coaches.

More than anything else, K-State needs speed to get better.

---

Kevin K. in Lawton, Okla., writes: So how is it now to go through a mailbag without getting any questions mentioning Nebraska?

DU: Oh, I still get Nebraska questions. Plenty of them, in fact. I just don't post them. We both know all you guys would get mad. Unless you really want to talk about Nebraska's new offensive scheme ...

---

Adam in Kansas writes: Turner Gill came into Kansas saying they would run the football and even have fullback sets. With the new recruiting class featuring a couple of highly rated RBs, and James Sims and Brandon Bourbon returning, will the Jayhawks have a ground game that can carry the offense?

DU: It's getting closer, but no question, that's where Kansas needs to focus. They don't have a ton of talent at receiver -- guys who can break games open -- so a ball-control offense that features the running game is probably their best option. They tried to be pretty balanced early last season, and it just didn't work. Obviously, they have to throw the ball some time, but running the ball is what Kansas should do best next year. They lost Brad Thorson and Sal Capra from the offensive line, so the new starters will have to fill the role well, but they also added Darrian Miller from the 2011 class, and he enrolled early. They're deep at running back with some guys who have a lot of potential, so while they figure out what they're going to do at quarterback, they need to expend a lot of energy refining the running game.

Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe took part in a forum in New York earlier this week alongside other conference commissioners, including the Big Ten's Jim Delany, and of course, expansion and a college football playoff were topics of discussion.

In short, don't expect a playoff soon.

Delany warned that the plus-1 format would lead to a slippery slope, where conference commissioners would not be able to stop further expansion. “Take a look at regular-season basketball,” he said, adding that the expanded tournament has devalued the regular season. "One leads to four, and four leads to eight. You won't be able to stop it."

While I agree that there's little reason for optimism regarding a college football playoff, I disagree with Delany's sentiment. By now, I'm tired of reading playoff scenarios, so I won't bother writing one, but I'm generally in support of an eight-team playoff.

He's right up until he gets to eight, but then what? Not much. In any given season, there are four teams playing national championship-caliber football. Sometimes, that number broaches eight. Never does it reach 16, and I don't hear much chatter from anyone clamoring for a college football playoff to expand to that many teams.

Not everyone likes the idea of an eight-team playoff, and that's fine. Delany is in that group. But I have a hard time believing anyone would ever make a serious push for a championship bracket to expand further.

Beebe and Delany agreed that a playoff would make more money, but, "It would be a huge disservice to players to add games," Beebe said.

Again, I disagree. Finals are wrapping up this week or next week at universities across the country, but the two weeks that follow aren't exactly jam-packed.

Anyway, Beebe got a somewhat humorous quip in when the subject of Delany and Pac-10 commissioner's efforts over the summer came up. Both raided the Big 12 and made their leagues both 12-member conferences.

Beebe referred to both Delany and Scott as predators before laughing and adding that he ""won't put them in a headlock yet.”

We'll see Nebraska play angry the rest of its season. Generally, I'm not a fan of dwelling on officiating after a game. It accomplishes very little and wastes plenty of breath, a bit like screaming at a brick wall. An apology is the best you can expect from anyone who'll listen, which is a select few.

I'll make a brief exception here.

There were a few questionable flags, and the roughing the passer penalty that kept Texas A&M's game-winning drive alive was an indefensible bad call. Courtney Osborne made a clean hit on Ryan Tannehill on time and below the helmet. I know Nebraska fans are also angry about the flag Ben Cotton received, but you're naive if you think that worse doesn't happen under piles every Saturday. I don't blame Cotton for retaliating, but let's not act like he's the first and only player to ever have an opponent's hand in an uncomfortable place. The cameras just caught this one. That said, the flag discrepancy (16-2, in favor of Texas A&M) doesn't tell the whole story. Both pass interference calls and the PI that officials initially flagged on Texas A&M but later waved off were the right calls, and Nebraska was flagged for just one holding penalty, football's most subjective penalty. The vast majority of the Huskers' other penalties were personal fouls, false starts or illegal procedures. Those are mental errors, not conspiring flag-tossers with a mandate from league headquarters in (gasp!) Texas.

Nebraska got the short end of this one, no doubt. It happens. Most of the close calls went the way of the Aggies. The Huskers have a right to be angry. But they also have to realize they didn't play well enough to win; good penalties, bad penalties, injuries or otherwise. All three happen in every game, and Nebraska couldn't overcome them. A mature team puts this loss behind it, and goes out and captures the goals in front of it, big goals like the Big 12 title which is still very much in Nebraska's grasp. We'll find out how mature this team is over the next two weeks (or maybe one, if it loses to Colorado.)

The Huskers were already playing with a bit of an us-against-the-world edge after the suspension of Eric Martin earlier in the year, and that will only intensify now. Also, I got in touch with my buddy over at the Big Ten blog, Adam Rittenberg, and after checking with Jim Delany & Co. at the league office in Chicago, we can report that in almost a century of Big Ten football, no call has ever been missed. So take heed, Huskers. Upon your exit to the Big Ten, you'll finally be out from underneath the tyrannical thumb of human error.

We've still got some interesting division races. Oklahoma won to stay alive, and Nebraska lost to keep Missouri alive, which means both divisions are up for grabs in the season's final weekend. That should be some solid drama. Nebraska will head back home to face a rolling Colorado team brimming with confidence and a new coach. Oklahoma State will host Oklahoma in Stillwater for a Bedlam with the most on the line for both teams in a long time. I'd expect Nebraska and Oklahoma State to hold serve at home, but would it surprise me if either went down? Not entirely.

Oklahoma's road problems don't extend to Waco. The Sooners got it done in a big way against Baylor, notching their first convincing road victory of the season with a 53-24 win. The offensive execution was there, even after an interception on Oklahoma's first drive, which is a good sign of some mental toughness. The defense held long enough for the Sooners to rack up a 53-10 lead before the Bears added a couple fourth-quarter garbage-time scores, and it forced a safety, scored a touchdown and forced three turnovers. That'll get it done. But at the end of the day, Oklahoma isn't going to impress anyone by stretching its record to 20-0 all-time against the Bears. The true test comes Saturday in Stillwater against the Big 12's most consistent team, Oklahoma State, in one of the program's biggest games ever.

Colorado is playing its best football of the season. Where did this come from? Beating Iowa State at home is one thing. Out-powering a physical Kansas State team is another. That's exactly what Colorado did, jumping out to a second-half lead on the back of Rodney Stewart and riding him to the finish line while Carson Coffman and the Wildcats had to sling it to play catch-up. Colorado is putting it all together under Brian Cabral, and now faces a monumental task, heading to Lincoln with bowl eligibility on the line for the Buffs, and the Big 12 North at stake for the Huskers.

The SEC is king in college football after producing each of the last four national champions. That won't change until a team from another league hoists the crystal football.

But the SEC has a reason to look over its shoulder this season. Several of them, in fact. The Big 12, Pac-10 and Big Ten are trying to catch the SEC, and all three leagues can make cases for being the nation's No. 2 conference right now. According to the ESPN Stats & Info conference power rankings, the Big 12 is No. 2, followed by the Pac-10 and the Big Ten.

Which conference is right behind the SEC?

Bloggers David Ubben (Big 12), Ted Miller (Pac-10) and Adam Rittenberg (Big Ten) weigh in.

Adam Rittenberg: What the Big Ten lacks -- an undefeated team -- it more than makes up for with incredible depth. The league boasts three 1-loss teams in Wisconsin, Ohio State and Michigan State, all of which could finish 11-1. It also boasts a veteran Iowa team that no one wants to face in a bowl, in addition to decent squads like Northwestern, Penn State and Michigan. Even Illinois has made some major strides from 2009.

This is the deepest the Big Ten has been since 2006, when it entered late November with the nation's No. 1 and No. 2 team and three teams -- Ohio State, Michigan and Wisconsin -- ranked in the top 7 of the final BCS standings. The Big Ten's rise also has occurred while Michigan rebuilds. The league also has significantly upgraded its quarterback play, boasting five of the nation's top 15 rated passers. Although the Big Ten's nonconference performance was just so-so, competition within the league seems to be largely undervalued by those evil BCS computers. A top-tier SEC or Big 12 program seems to get much more credit for beating a mid-level team in its league than Wisconsin gets for beating Iowa on the road or Michigan State gets for beating Northwestern on the road. The human voters see the Big Ten in a different light.

The Big Ten finished the 2009-10 bowl season as the nation's No. 2 conference, recording four victories against top 15 opponents.

Nothing has changed to move the Big Ten off of the second line.

David Ubben: Hey, I get it. In college football, a conference is only as strong as its strongest link. That's how the expression goes, right? Gimme a break.

The Big 12 has landed a team in the title game in each of the past two seasons. Despite being on the outside looking in on this year's chase, the league still has five teams in the top 20, and earlier this year, nine teams were in the poll or receiving votes. All that should be even more impressive considering the league's glamour program, Texas, at 4-6, is having a "down year" that is insulting to down years. Nine consecutive seasons of at least 10 wins for the Longhorns has come to a rather spectacularly bad end.

But otherwise, strength is everywhere. Baylor is having one of the program's best years and should be just as good in 2011. Missouri, had they not tripped up at Texas Tech, could be in the top 10. Oklahoma State has emerged as the league's surprise top 10 team and Nebraska is proving everybody wrong who thought they were overrated in the preseason. Texas A&M struggled early, but has won four Big 12 games in a row to reach the top 20. All in a down year for the two programs who have ruled the conference, Oklahoma and Texas.

Outside of Colorado, which is leaving anyway, and rebuilding Kansas, every team in the league is proving to be, at the very least, capable. Iowa State, despite playing the toughest schedule in college football, still has a chance to qualify for a bowl, and if Texas does the same by beating rival Texas A&M, the league could have 10 bowl-eligible teams.

So maybe the Big 12 doesn't have a team vying for the crystal football this year, but it has a whole lot of really good teams, and a handful of others who are proving there's no such thing as an easy week in the Big 12.

Ted Miller: Over at the Pac-10, we're grinning. We're about to point out the Pac-10 plays a nine-game conference schedule, which automatically adds five losses to the conference, which, of course, hurts the conference's national perception, not to mention its number of bowl-eligible teams. Every other BCS conference plays eight, other than the eight-team Big East. But that’s not why we're grinning. We're grinning because the Big Ten and the Big 12 will do that soon, and then they'll find out the perception consequence of not giving your entire conference an extra win with a nonconference patsy. Of course, the savvy SEC will continue to play eight conference games, schedule weak nonconference opponents and then trumpet itself as super-awesome.

Why is the Pac-10 No. 2? Well, it's got the nation's No. 1 team in Oregon. It's got the nation's No. 6 team in Stanford, which many believe to be the nation's best one-loss team. And four of 10 teams are ranked. Are Iowa and Wisconsin good teams? Absolutely. But Iowa lost to Arizona, which has three Pac-10 defeats, and Wisconsin got a fluky one-point win at home over Arizona State, which is 2-5 in the Pac-10. The Pac-10 is 10-4 overall vs. other BCS conferences. It's ranked No. 1 by the Sagarin ratings, which for some reason don't believe stadium size is a true measure of a team or a conference. Even lowly Washington State is no longer the pushover it was the previous two seasons.

Depth? Let's put it this way: The Pac-10 would love to match the team that ends up second to last in its conference versus the one that ends up in that spot anywhere else.

Rittenberg: Three strong cases for the No. 2 spot. But are any of these leagues closing the gap with the SEC?

Ubben: I guess we'll find out come bowl season, but I don't know that anybody in the Big 12 is in position for a run like the SEC's enjoyed in the latter half of the last decade.

Oklahoma and Texas will be Oklahoma and Texas, but the strength of the Big 12 has been a rising middle class with teams like Oklahoma State, Missouri, Texas A&M and maybe Baylor and Texas Tech positioning themselves to become mainstays in the top 25 during the next couple years or beyond.

That's good for the computer ratings, but not good for a league trying to field a national champion. And for better or worse, a league's ultimate identity boils down to its best team or two. Thanks to that rising middle class, getting inside the top five and staying there could be harder than ever in the next few years.

Miller: Are we talking reality or perception? Because the SEC's ostensible superiority is largely about perception -- i.e., fan passion equals great football. The Pac-10 has a winning record vs. the SEC over the past decade, and the Big Ten has done just fine vs. the SEC in the Capital One and Outback Bowls. The SEC is probably No. 1, but the margin is thin, and the conference refuses to prove its superiority during the regular season by consistently scheduling tough nonconference games.

When USC ruled the Pac-10 from 2002-2008, folks called the conference the Trojans and the nine dwarfs. Now that USC has fallen, Oregon has risen, and teams such as Stanford and Arizona also have made moves. But USC will be back. That's just inevitable. And if Utah continues to play at a high level after it joins the Pac-12, you could make the case that the Pac-10 should start to produce multiple top-10 teams and five or six top-25 teams annually, which would put it on par with the SEC.

And, honestly, with resurgent Nebraska joining the Big Ten, I'm not sure we won't have a new No. 1 conference in 2011 anyway.

Rittenberg: Well, Ted made most of my points for me. I'll be sending a gift basket to Scottsdale.

The Big Ten certainly has matched up well with the SEC in the Capital One and Outback bowls, and the addition of Nebraska next fall truly enhances the league's clout. Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany often points out the only way his league truly regains national respect is by beating the best from another conference at the championship level. The Big Ten still gets bashed for Ohio State's stumbles against the SEC in the BCS title game, and barring a wild final three weeks, a Big Ten squad won't be facing Auburn on Jan. 10 in Glendale. So the Big Ten must wait for that true statement game.

When I look at these two leagues from top to bottom, I don't see much difference. The Big Ten has continued to build off of its strong finish to 2009, while the SEC seems to have backslid. All you need to do is look at the SEC East division. Could Wisconsin, Ohio State and Michigan State beat Auburn or LSU? It's possible, but I really think the entire league matches up better now with what the SEC is offering.

Like Ted writes, it's all about perception. Until a team from another league beats the SEC at the highest level, the SEC will keep living off of its incredible run.

But the Big Ten is catching up.

Cole Hazard just got a call saying he has 89 minutes left to live ... from himself.

• Nebraska wasn't on the Big Ten's original list of targets, and the school was generally happy in the Big 12 before being warned by a tipster in January that they could be left out of a major conference if realignment occurred. This and more in a comprehensive look back at Nebraska's decision to move to the Big Ten from the Omaha World Herald's Henry J. Cordes. This is a must read, and the details from the May 25 meeting between Tom Osborne, Harvey Perlman and Jim Delany are straight out of a spy movie. Cordes' account is the most definitive take to date of the most impactful conference realignment move of the summer.
• Be ready for lots of substitutions for Texas Tech on defense, reports Don Williams of the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal.
• An attorney for Missouri running back Derrick Washington says Washington was never served the order of protection filed against him by the victim who alleges sexual assault.
• Texas A&M will be without defensive lineman Stephen Barrera for the 2010 season after the sophomore suffered a hip injury.
• Texas coach Mack Brown says Vince Young deserves Reggie Bush's vacated Heisman. I disagree. Here are my thoughts from when USC first gave back its trophy.
• Oklahoma defensive tackle Adrian Taylor may suit up in the season opener, just nine months after a gruesome dislocated ankle.
• Meanwhile, coach Bob Stoops says tough nonconference schedules have become "high-risk, low-reward." Berry Tramel of the Oklahoman says Stoops is misguided and suffering from short-term memory loss.
• Jesse Newell at the Lawrence Journal-World chronicles Steven Johnson's lengthy journey from little-used linebacker to starter for the Jayhawks.
• It's all there for the Aggies. All the pieces necessary for a Big 12 title run. Can they put them together? Brent Zwerneman of the San Antonio Express-News asks a few players and coaches.
• Colorado is still working on its exit date from the Big 12 into the Pac-10, reports John Henderson of the Denver Post.
• Oklahoma State DE Jamie Blatnick and S Victor Johnson's status for Saturday's opener is unclear, and two running backs have left the program, reports Bill Haisten of the Tulsa World.
• Baylor is ready for its first test, writes John Werner of the Waco Tribune-Herald.

At last week's Big 12 media days, commissioner Dan Beebe joked that he was in negotiations with Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany to switch the names of the conference, but later mentioned that he'd heard of leagues (wink-wink) whose names didn't match the number in their membership.

He also seriously answered that the league would pursue its options on a future name. After Delany's comments on Monday, the first day of Big Ten media days, you can cross the Big Ten off that list of options.

"I think the Big Ten is the Big Ten regardless of the number," Delany said. "By the way, Beebe did not call me on that one."

But Delany continued with a few interesting anecdotes about his relationship with Beebe, who followed up Delany's ten-year tenure as commissioner of the Ohio Valley Conference with a 13-year reign of his own.

Delany said it was him who recommended Beebe for the job, and later recommended Beebe for his job as the Big 12's No. 2 man and the eventual commissioner.

"So, you know, that's why the things, the expansion, tensions are hard on fans and schools and the college community in general," Delany said. "But they're also hard on people who are friends."

He maintained that the two remain friends, but also expressed doubts about the conference's future. Luckily, Delany is a bit outside Beebe's jurisdiction, so he doesn't have to worry about fines.

"I'm very proud of how he represented his conference and how he fought for their survival. And I told him that. I said, 'I don't know if it will all hang together for you or not.' But I have a tremendous amount of respect on how he represented his institutions," Delany said. "And at the beginning of the process we tried to create a process that would allow us to communicate with each other and maintain respect for each other."

IRVING, Texas -- Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe began his response with a joke, but it had some truth to it.

"I'm in communication with [Big Ten] commissioner Jim Delany now about a swap," Beebe said of his conference's name.

I get a bit annoyed at fans and writers who like to jokingly note the irony of the Big Ten's 12 teams and the Big 12's 10, but I'll admit Beebe made me laugh with that one. Also, I was surprised that the league wasn't 100 percent certain of its brand strength, and would consider a name change.

"I'm going to spend the next eight to nine months, prior to our next year when we have 10 members, fully exploring what we want to do in that regard," he said.

That may mean keeping the name. It would seem the "Big Ten" would be off the table, and the everyman confusion of a switch would make college football's recent switch from Division I and Division I-A to FBS and FCS forgettable.

I can't say I have any good suggestions, and I think the league will eventually keep its name, but Beebe sounds ready to do some homework.

"I've heard of conferences that have not had the exact numbers they have in their names actually be representing their membership," Beebe deadpanned in the direction of the Big Ten, which has had 11 members since the addition of Penn State in 1993. (Significantly funnier than his opening joke, even if the room of reporters was a few seconds behind on the reference.) "I think we need to look at not just whether we change our name or our brand, but what are the messages we want to convey going forward? We'll engage in a process to do that and hopefully in the spring, early summer next year, we'll have a better idea of what we want to do going forward."

• Iowa State defensive back David Sims, the 2009 Big 12 Defensive Newcomer of the Year, was formally charged with unauthorized use of a credit card, reports Randy Peterson of the Des Moines Register. The charge is an aggravated misdemeanor and Sims has been suspended and stripped of his co-captain status.
• Jeff Caplan at ESPN Dallas has a few notes from BCS director Bill Hancock's media session on Tuesday.
• The Omaha World-Herald's Lee Barfknecht is pondering six pretty fiery points from media days that I'll call today's must-read link.
• Early in his tenure at Nebraska, Bo Pelini did something that might get anyone else trampled in Lincoln today. He told Ndamukong Suh, "You stink," reports Mitch Sherman of the Omaha World-Herald. "Thank God he stayed. They might have run me out of town," Pelini told the paper.
• The Internet is reshaping recruiting even more now with a new social media site based around football recruiting, writes Rainer Sabin of the Dallas Morning News.
• Colorado is making changes to its practice access policies, reports Kyle Ringo of the Boulder Daily Camera.
• Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany paid Lincoln a visit this week, reports Curt McKeever of the Lincoln Journal Star.
• For Oklahoma State linebacker Orie Lemon, sitting for games was more painful than standing on his injured knee, writes Jenni Carlson of The Oklahoman.
• Oklahoma reserve running back Mossis Madu has been charged with driving under the influence after an arrest on Saturday night.
• Two incoming Colorado recruits have failed to qualify, reports Tom Kensler of the Denver Post.
• Tennessee running back Bryce Brown told Vols coach Derek Dooley in a text message that he won't play for the Volunteers this season. The Wichita native's brother, linebacker Arthur Brown, transferred to Kansas State earlier this year.

Days before his school left for the Big Ten, Nebraska athletic director Tom Osborne made a plea for patience.

"Eventually, all the facts will come out," he told the Lincoln Journal Star.

In an open session with Nebraska's board of regents, he made good on his promise, recounting the then-secret, contentious, but civil negotiations that took place during the Big 12 spring meetings early this month. He pointed at Texas and Missouri for failing to commit to the Big 12, and got the Huskers' exit underway with Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany at his side later that afternoon.

Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe may manage to convince Texas to stay and save the Big 12 with a sales pitch full of promises, money and the potential to create their own network, a luxury the Pac-10 reportedly wouldn't provide.

But the details and truth surrounding a proposal that at least made Texas slow its negotiations with the Pac-10, and at most saved the Big 12, should be fascinating. Beebe is predicting SEC-type numbers for the next fiscal year, and to be fair, the SEC earned $132.5 million last year. This year, they jumped to $209 million, issuing $17.3 million to each team in the conference. The Big 12 earned $139 million this year. To plan for a similar jump isn't impossible, but it is questionable. Planning for SEC numbers in the future sounds attractive, but the SEC's four consecutive national titles by three different teams don't give much reason to believe the SEC will slow its financial growth to let the Nebraska-less Big 12 catch up.

The Big 12 earned more than the Pac-10 in 2009, and that could continue -- even without Nebraska. I have my doubts about the claim that the new Big 12 could earn more than the Pac-16, but the idea of creating their own network -- whose revenue they wouldn't have to share -- might be enough to convince Texas to stay. Texas A&M could still leave, but the Pac-10 may have to add Utah and stand pat if the Longhorns don't choose to leave.

Beebe's last big plan didn't work out so well, but if this one does, schools like Kansas and Kansas State had better hope it comes with a long-term commitment. Otherwise, the league may end up in the exact same spot very soon. Texas has said all along they've wanted to keep the Big 12 together. Making this move would be the ultimate affirmation of what DeLoss Dodds' has preached from the start of realignment rumors. The motives behind Texas' reconsideration of a move to the Pac-10 could be anything. They might believe Beebe's plan, which presumably came with input from the actual networks they'd be negotiating with. They may believe they can make more money here. They may be calling Texas A&M's bluff to see if the Aggies have the gumption to leave for the SEC, providing the Longhorns with a third direction to point if the Big 12 breaks up, along with Lincoln and Columbia.

Little is certain in a story that seems to shift by the hour. What I know for sure is I hope Beebe and/or Dodds take a page from Osborne and let the public in when all this is finished. They'd be better off for it.

Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany followed his protocol, placing a call to Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe on Friday morning to notify him that they would be accepting Nebraska's application into the Big Ten.

Beebe had no further comments on Nebraska's departure, calling it "disappointing."

But Delany didn't mention another team looking for inclusion to the Big Ten, Missouri.

"My understanding is there aren't any other conference members considered by the Big Ten," Beebe said.

That's a big uh-oh in Columbia for a school that's turned the Forgotten Four into the Forlorn Five over the course of the past week. Missouri may end up getting a Big Ten invite when the conference makes its next move toward expansion, something Delany said could happen in the future. But Delany, altering his previously stated timeline, shows just how badly he wanted the Huskers in his league.

"We were ready to move more quickly when this opportunity arose,” he said.

But it also shows that Missouri won't be placed on the fast track for membership. And if five Big 12 South teams split for the Pac-10 next week, Missouri's position in the league will only become more awkward. With the Big Ten still in play, don't expect Missouri to fully commit to the other four teams whose best bet include a partnership with the Mountain West Conference, Conference USA, or obliterating the Big 12 for a move to the Big East.

"When 'the dust settles,' Mizzou will be in a strong position nationally," athletic director Mike Alden said in a statement. "We don't know the timeline of all of these activities, so your patience and commitment is appreciated."

Alden has a lot of faith, and he should. As the head of the athletic department, he has to. He didn't place any qualifiers on that statement. But the second half is more telling: Missouri may still have to abide by the Big Ten's original timeline.

In short, Missouri's future could be in limbo through 2010 and into next year. How far -- and if it ends -- is up to Delany.

Delany apologized on Friday for leaving schools unsure of their future. Clearly, Missouri falls under that umbrella.

Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman pointed to comments from Missouri "not fully supportive of the Big 12" as a reason for leaving, and it was a good one. That's not going to change until an opportunity to join the Big Ten is completely off the table.

Missouri deserves a good amount of blame in a Big 12 breakup, too, but unlike Kansas and Kansas State, they can't fully commit to a cleanup -- however that ends up looking.

If Missouri spends the next six to 12 months riding the fence between committing to the remaining members of the Big 12 and positioning itself for an invitation to the Big Ten, its relationship with schools like Kansas and Kansas State will only splinter further. And unless that invitation to apply arrives in the end, Missouri better get used to a whole lot of awkwardness.