ESPN College Football

Expansion rumors are flying again, with Texas A&M's flirtation with the SEC setting off speculation of another conference shuffle. But the Big Ten says it's not interested in taking that ride.

The league put out a statement Friday afternoon acknowledging that its council of presidents and chancellors (the COP/C) recently met to talk about expansion and other issues. But, the statement read:

"[T]he COP/C would like to reiterate that it will not be actively engaged in conference expansion at this time, or at any time in the foreseeable future, barring a significant shift in the current intercollegiate athletic landscape.

"The COP/C is aware that speculation about the possibility of expansion by the Big Ten Conference continues despite a statement from COP/C Chair and Indiana University President Michael McRobbie on December 5, 2010, indicating that the COP/C believed the expansion process had reached its natural conclusion, that it was pleased with the addition of Nebraska, and that it looked forward to working with its new colleagues in the years ahead.

"The conference has spent the past 14 months actively engaged in incorporating Nebraska, academically and athletically, into the fabric of the conference.

"'We're about as comfortable as we can be with where we are,' said Big Ten Commissioner James E. Delany. 'We've said that we will continue to monitor the landscape, but we have closed down active expansion and have no plans to seek new members.'"

This isn't all that surprising. The Big Ten added Nebraska and is comfortable with 12 teams; there's not a huge appetite for more expansion right now (nor are there overwhelmingly great candidates for such). As I wrote earlier this week, the Cornhuskers are a terrific fit, and the Big Ten should keep that line of thinking when it comes to expansion: better, not necessarily bigger.

But the statement includes the caveat "barring a significant shift" in the landscape. I think the SEC going to 16 teams and the Pac-12 following suit, with the breakdown of the Big 12, would constitute a significant shift. Fact is, the Big Ten has to be ready to pounce if the superconferences come to fruition or it will risk being left with the scraps if it ever does want to expand.

But for right now, the Big Ten is hoping that things don't change that much in college football, and that it can stay at 12 for the time being. We'll see how realistic a goal that is.

So let's get this straight: Texas A&M had the moving vans revved up and ready to head to the SEC, only the SEC said why don't we cool things down a bit while schools like Missouri, Clemson and Florida State are waiting to see what happens.

All of which brings home one point when it comes to the league we cover in these parts. The Big Ten sure got its expansion right, didn't it?

Jim Delany and the conference leaders scooped up Nebraska last year when it looked like the Big 12 was fracturing and the Pac-16 thing was happening. Maybe the Big Ten doesn't make the move that quickly if not for those external circumstances, but in this case, swiftness and correctness went hand in hand.

The Cornhuskers have yet to play a game in their new league, but you can't find anyone who doesn't think this is a terrific fit. Nebraska not only matches geographically in the Big Ten, adding a natural rival with Iowa, but also philosophically in its style of play and fervent fan base. Most importantly, Nebraska is a marquee program and a national power. Even if the Huskers haven't been to a BCS game since the 2002 Rose Bowl disaster, they appear back on the rise under Bo Pelini.

Now, compare that with other conferences. The Pac-12's bold play for Texas, Oklahoma and others last year drew praise for commissioner Larry Scott. But the league ended up with Colorado and Utah, neither of which possess Nebraska's stature.

Will Texas A&M really do much for the SEC? The Aggies haven't won a bowl game since 2001 and haven't claimed a conference championship since 1998. Not much separates them from a program like Northwestern except for tradition.

Should A&M still pull off an SEC marriage, there could be a wild scramble among leagues to grab the remains of the Big 12 or raid the ACC and Big East. But Delany says the Big Ten is comfortable for now with its 12-team alignment. Adding teams like Missouri or Kansas doesn't do much for the league except split the revenue pie into more slices, and it could possibly dilute the product. Unless the Big Ten could grab some truly big fish like Texas, Oklahoma or Notre Dame, expanding may not be worth the trouble. Nebraska was the only real big fish to jump into a new pond last summer.

Bigger isn't always better. But the Big Ten sure got its expansion push right last time.

Big East expansion plans are on hold, which means more waiting for schools like UCF.

Of course, that is nothing new. UCF has been waiting for years for its opportunity to join an automatic-qualifying conference. But the prevailing thought was once a decision was made on whether Villanova would become a Big East member, UCF would get more clarity on its future.

The news earlier this week that no decision is imminent meant no clarity. UCF athletics director Keith Tribble told The Orlando Sentinel for Wednesday editions, "We're sitting on the sideline trying to monitor the situation."

UCF and Houston are thought to be among the top potential candidates to join the Big East. Memphis and East Carolina have also been mentioned, but the Knights appear to be in the best position of the Conference USA schools that could become members. They add another school in recruiting rich Florida, have a natural rivalry with USF and just missed out on joining the league during the last major wave of expansion. Their upgraded, expanded facilities and recent success also adds to their résumé.

There appears to be a struggle in the Big East among the basketball powers and football powers. Adding Villanova to the football mix never seemed to make much sense because that would do nothing to enhance its reputation. And the Big East needs all the help it can get in that department, beyond adding TCU for 2012. Featuring a school that has a small fan base and would be playing in an off-campus soccer stadium clearly started giving some of the Big East presidents second thoughts.

So until a decision is made, the waiting game continues.

During my two months away, the Adelson mailbag overflowed with plenty of queries. For those wondering, no, I could never forget about the "little sisters of the poor." I was just trying to ward off sleep deprivation while taking care of a newborn and 2-year-old. I had middling success. Hopefully, I will fare much better in this edition of the mailbag. Since I got so much mail, stay tuned for several mailbag posts this week.

Kevin Clifton of Hattiesburg, Miss., writes: How long does the WAC have? Is it on life support? How long before the MWC poaches Utah State away? Then what? I see Louisiana Tech and UT-San Antonio going to Conference USA after Houston and Central Florida leave for greener pastures in the Big East. Then UTEP goes to the MWC, New Mexico State and Texas State go to the Sun Belt. All you would have left is Idaho and San Jose State. San Jose State is thinking of dropping their status as a FBS school and Idaho, who needs them? If you have Boise State, you have the Boise market. I also see Army keeping its home television rights and joining the MAC and I see Navy doing the same and joining Conference-USA.

Andrea Adelson writes: Kevin is the grand Nostradamus of college football expansion! This plan sounds good, but there are a few problems. First, the WAC might actually survive, depending on what happens with everyone else. That does seem hard to believe, but let us say it implodes. The Sun Belt really wants to keep its geographic footprint and I do not see the league going into New Mexico. It does the Sun Belt no good. A recent report in the Miami Herald explained as much, and also theorizes that Louisiana Tech could find a landing spot here. Of course, a lot of that is dependent of what happens with the Big East, which could choose Memphis or East Carolina ahead of Houston. Much of that depends on whether the league wants a travel partner for TCU. If Houston is not chosen, it would have to decide whether it wants to stay in C-USA or maybe even go to the Mountain West should that league want to expand to 12. Utah State is not a part of those expansion plans right now. Even though it would theoretically bring the Salt Lake City market, the school really does not have a fan base as big as BYU or Utah to meaningfully replace that market. Army was in a league before and that did not work so well for the service academy so I would bet on the Black Knights staying independent.

---

Brad in Dallas writes: What do you think TCU's record will be this upcoming season? What are your thoughts on the TCU-Boise St. match up? Do you think TCU has a chance to win on the blue turf?

Adelson writes: Never too early for way too early predictions, right? My best-case scenario has TCU at 10-2 this season, with losses to Baylor and Boise State. I have Baylor down as a loss right now for a few reasons. First, Casey Pachall will be making his first start at quarterback and it is on the road. It is very tough for first-year starters to win on the road, especially right out of the gate. Second, first games are usually tough because you do not have the identity of your team yet, and there are generally a lot of mistakes. I also have the game at Boise State as a loss. The Broncos get the edge because of Kellen Moore, and because of the blue turf. But TCU definitely has a chance -- especially if its defensive line is going to be as good as Gary Patterson anticipates. That is the key to slowing down Boise State, being able to put adequate pressure on Moore to force him to make mistakes and hurry throws. I reserve the right to change my mind between now and the start of the season, so stay tuned!

---

Joe Mimnaugh in Las Vegas writes: With both Boise and TCU in a semi-rebuilding year and TCU leaving, do you think that TCU might tank a few games to 1, get revenge on the MWC for their schedule and 2, to make sure that any chance the MWC of becoming a BCS conference is not realized? Do you think that the MWC will be better in a few years after the changes are done, or would the WAC in 2011 be better than a MWC in 2014?

Adelson writes: No shot that TCU tanks anything. If anything, the Horned Frogs want to stick it to the Mountain West for moving the Boise State game to Boise. You will not find a competitor out there who would rather tank games than win championships. TCU will do everything it can to leave the Mountain West with yet another conference title. As for the future of the MWC, the league has dim prospects of becoming an automatic qualifier even if the Horned Frogs go 12-0 again. I think it would have to take winning an appeal to the Presidential Oversight Committee to become AQ. As for the WAC in 2011 vs. the Mountain West in 2014, the essential difference is Boise State -- and that would make the Mountain West stronger.

The Big East has announced its plans to expand to 10 teams. Villanova is currently undergoing a study to determine whether it will move up to the FBS level and join the Big East, and that process is expected to be completed in April.

The two timelines, however, do not necessarily intersect.

I spoke with Big East commissioner John Marinatto on Tuesday about a host of topics, including expansion. I asked him if the league was waiting on Villanova to make its decision before it went forward with other options.

"We're not waiting for Villanova," Marinatto said. "It's their institutional decision to make, and they have a process set up to make it. They've got to determine what's in their best interest, and we've got to determine what's in our best interest."

Marinatto said he didn't have a good idea of which way Villanova was leaning right now and doesn't know if the school even knows that yet.

"It is a complicated issue for any institution, and probably even more complicated for a small, private institution," he said.

I asked Marinatto if the Big East could decide to add another team before Villanova finalizes its plans in April.

"If the right situation developed in between, we would move on it," he said. "That's a very real possibility. We're not going to make a decision or not make a decision based on Villanova's study."

This makes sense from the league point of view. The Big East originally had hoped for an answer from Villanova by the end of 2010, but the school understandably wanted more time to study all the many factors involved, especially the finances of big-time football.

But the league can't just sit idly by and wait for the Wildcats, who would need a few years to get up to FBS qualifying standards anyway. If the conference decided to add, say, Central Florida, it could do so now and easily fold in Villanova at a later date, as there would be very little transition with a school that competes in all other Big East sports.

I'll have more from Marinatto on Wednesday, including his thoughts on the 2010 season and the outlook for the league's future.

As the speculation machine starts to swirl about potential teams in the mix to join the Big East, UCF issued a statement Wednesday saying there has been no contact with the league.

Maybe not yet, but you can bet there is significant interest from UCF, which failed in its bid to join the Big East the last time the conference expanded. Instead, cross-state rival USF got the nod, leaving the school waiting for another chance to get into an automatic-qualifying conference.

You can watch my video pointing out why this is a good fit for UCF. The Knights would crawl on their hands and knees to Big East league offices in Rhode Island if it meant getting a bid. The school now has the second-largest enrollment in the nation, a new football stadium, improved facilities, and is bowl eligible for the third time in four years. Though USF has been against adding UCF, there may be a way to smooth over those tensions for the good of the conference.

After all, the Big East needs to survive first and foremost, and adding two more conference members helps. Especially if another team from Florida comes into play.

There is still much to sort out about Tuesday's announcement that the Big East is moving from eight to 10 teams. One conference insider told me that the league's list of possible contenders is "in alphabetical order" right now, meaning that there's no clear No. 1 target.

But the conference has been researching teams for months now and has a pretty good idea of who would be a good fit and who wouldn't. The pressure is on Villanova to make a decision whether to move up and join the league in football. The league also has to decide whether it asks schools to join as football-only members and risks getting turned down because of that, or whether it wants to add to the already-unwieldy 16-team structure in basketball. Growing to 17 or 18 teams is not something the basketball-only schools are particularly excited about.

Here is my ranking of teams that should be considered to fill spots No. 9 and 10 in the Big East football universe:

1. TCU: The Horned Frogs are currently No. 3 in the BCS standings, a year after playing in the Fiesta Bowl. Is there any doubt they could come in and win the league title right away? They also bring a great market in Fort Worth/Dallas and would love the chance to earn an automatic BCS bid. But TCU doesn't offer much of anything in basketball and would have to find a home for its other sports if the Big East asked it to join as a football-only member. And Texas is not exactly in the East.

2. Central Florida: Geographically, UCF makes the most sense, giving the league another foothold in Florida and a natural rival for USF. The school has a huge student body and brand new facilities with a potential for quick growth. The downside is extra competition for recruits out of Florida for other Big East teams.

3. Villanova: The Wildcats solve a lot of practical headaches, as the Big East wouldn't have to add another school for other sports. They also have the Philadelphia market and offer another rival for the Northeast schools. But it would be at least two years before Villanova could qualify for FBS status, and even with a quick rise a la South Florida or UConn, it will take another couple years after that before the team is truly competitive for a BCS bid. This seems like an option the Big East can keep in its back pocket while pursuing other ideas.

4. Houston: Pros: The Cougars have some history of success and an excellent young coach in Kevin Sumlin. Plus, it's another huge market and a possible rival for TCU. There are plans for a new stadium. Con: Houston is overshadowed in its own city by Texas and Texas A&M.

5. Temple: If Villanova doesn't work out, the Big East can turn back to this former member for the Philadelphia market. Unlike 'Nova, Temple actually has a place to play and has turned itself into a solid program, even beating UConn this year. Temple also has a home for its other sports (Atlantic 10). The worry is whether the program can sustain its momentum if hotshot coach Al Golden moves on.

Others: East Carolina, Memphis, Marshall, Navy. All have major warts -- with ECU, it's location; Memphis, lack of facilities and success -- and the Big East would be advised to exhaust the first five possibilities before turning here.

With all that in mind, what are your top options for the two new members? Use this list as your guide, because Notre Dame isn't coming on board, Boston College isn't returning and no other current BCS conference school is abandoning ship for the Big East. Send me your suggestions here and we'll discuss.

Speculation has swirled today about talks between Conference USA and the Mountain West. Representatives of both leagues did meet Thursday in what they said was a previously scheduled meeting.

Because of all the speculation today, C-USA Commissioner Britton Banowsky has issued the following statement:

"The conferences have much in common and have worked cooperatively for many years and we are exploring creative ways to work together going forward. The discussion included scheduling, television and postseason football. It is premature for anyone to suggest anything else at this point. We have the strong support of our members as we work on a variety of strategic initiatives. We had a good discussion yesterday and likely will have more in the future."

One of the scenarios that has been reported has the winners of both leagues facing each other for the right to get into a BCS game. The current BCS cycle ends in 2014. Postseason play was reportedly one topic of discussion during these meetings. Another reported a potential merger between the two leagues.

A merger seems unwieldy. If there has been talk of a postseason game, perhaps the Mountain West realizes it won't become an AQ conference and figures playing C-USA in a playoff style game for a spot in the BCS would be its best shot at getting non-AQ leagues a seat at the BCS table every year.

The big question is whether the BCS is willing to give one of its spots to a non-AQ team annually. Currently, non-AQ teams are eligible for an at-large berth if they finish in the top 12 of the final BCS standings; or a non-AQ team is ranked in the top 16 of the final BCS standings and its ranking is higher than that of an AQ champion.

Also, the Mountain West has seemingly done just fine getting into BCS games without having to rely on another conference. Conference USA has been the one hoping to get a BCS buster.

Big East fans breathed a sigh of relief when the Big Ten plucked Nebraska from the Big 12 and seemed happy to stop its expansion right there for now.

But how long that "for now" lasts remains a question, and this story by the New York Post's Len Robbins over the weekend points out that the Big Ten still remains keen on adding teams in the Boston-New York-Washington D.C. corridor. In other words, Rutgers and to lesser extents Syracuse and UConn could still be in the crosshairs.

"For us it's important," Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany told Robbins about his league having a presence in New York City. "I consider the East Coast to be as important to us as the West Coast is even though the West Coast has got the Rose Bowl and the Big Ten-Pac-10 relationship. And it's so because of the recruitment of students, the recruitment of athletes, the size and scope of the markets. I hope it becomes more important."

Delany also told Robbins that the league is sticking to its timeline, originally set in December 2009, of a 12-to-18 month study period for expansion possibilities. Which means expansion isn't necessarily done with Nebraska. The Big Ten and Big East have their media days at the same time early next month, and the topic is sure to be a hot one at both.

Delany also expressed some doubt about whether the new Pinstripe Bowl in Yankee Stadium will be enough to attract the city's attention.

"We'll see how some of the other bowl games, which may not be top tier, produce," he said. "My sense about that bowl was, 'It's great to be in New York but you better come with your 'A' game.' . . because I don't think the New York market really responds to anything but the 'A' game."

He's probably right about that, but the bowl game doesn't need to capture the entire city's attention to be successful. Because of limited seating in the baseball stadium for football, if a team like Rutgers brings 15,000-to-20,000 fans to the game, then the bowl can easily sell out.

The Big Ten expansion buzz has died down significantly since Nebraska came aboard, but a potentially key development took place during the weekend. Debbie Yow, the longtime athletic director at Maryland, left for the same post at N.C. State.

Maryland has long been mentioned as a fringe candidate for Big Ten expansion, and the buzz about the Terrapins increased in the days just before and just after the league added Nebraska. It's very possible that the Big Ten won't expand any further, as sources tell the Chicago Tribune's Teddy Greenstein, but the league is only six months into an expansion study that could last until June 2011. The Big Ten is back on its own timetable now, and it could "act again," as commissioner Jim Delany said, late this fall or early this winter.

If you've read anything about Maryland and the Big Ten, you've probably seen quotes like this from Yow:

"I haven't heard anything from the Big Ten, and, to the best of my knowledge, Dr. [C.D. 'Dan'] Mote [the university president] has not either. The Big Ten is a terrific conference, but Maryland is a charter member in 1953 of the ACC and we are happy in the ACC. These are deep roots."

More from Yow:

"Why would we go anywhere? For money? I think we have less callous, bottom-line motivations than that."

Yow seemed pretty clear about her ACC allegiance, but she's no longer at Maryland. The school also soon will have a new president, who Mote said likely will select the next athletic director.

Hmmm, new president, new athletic director ... new outlook toward the Big Ten?

I put the question to colleague Heather Dinich, who knows way more about Maryland athletics than any of us. Heather has covered Maryland for both ESPN.com and The Baltimore Sun. She also knows the Big Ten well, as an Indiana alum who covered Penn State.

Here's what she had to say about how Yow's departure affects Maryland and the Big Ten:

Yow's departure opens the door for anything and everything at Maryland, not only because she is leaving, but because the university will also be bringing in a new president soon. Yow had said repeatedly that she had had no contact with the Big Ten, and that there was no interest in leaving the ACC. A new administration might feel differently. The question is whether or not Maryland would actually be a good fit for the Big Ten. Competitively? I say no. (And I'm sticking to college football when I say that.) For example, look at Maryland's record against Penn State: 1-35-1. It's no wonder they haven't played since 1993. Why pick the Nits as an example? Well, because it's the only Big Ten school Maryland has played with any regularity. Also because Penn State recruits the state of Maryland, and has made a habit out of beating the Terps for their top in-state talent, though Maryland has picked up its recruiting efforts recently under offensive coordinator James Franklin.

Overall, Maryland is 4-44-1 against the Big Ten, but hasn't played anyone other than Michigan State more than five times and hasn't faced Illinois, Ohio State, Wisconsin, Iowa or Northwestern. Do Maryland fans really want to, though? A 2-10 record in the ACC won't translate well into a conference that just got bigger and better with the addition of Nebraska.

Man, 4-44-1. I didn't realize Maryland's Big Ten record was that brutal, although Penn State is the big reason why.

I look at Maryland a lot like Rutgers: a program with limited tradition in football that has the potential to help the Big Ten in several ways. Maryland gives the Big Ten an increased presence in a major metropolitan area, which should help grow the Big Ten Network. And like Rutgers, Maryland is located in a good area for high school recruiting, as teams like Penn State and Illinois already have found out. If the Big Ten chooses to expand again, it must make recruiting a bigger factor.

Does Maryland move the needle in football? Nope. But it gives the Big Ten a reason to be in the Washington D.C./Baltimore/Northern Virginia area.

In the end, that might be enough.

Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe made his feelings about any future Big 12 expansion clear on Tuesday. You might even call them "unequivocal."

"We're not looking to expand at all," he said. "And certainly we wouldn't look to expand with any institutions that are in our geographic, five-state area now. We're very comfortable with where we are and there's no interest in having an expansion review at this point, and I don't think it's going to come in the future."

Perhaps he should have said it louder. Two dozen Houston lawmakers sent the Big 12 a letter petitioning the conference to invite the University of Houston.

"Despite UH's local and statewide prominence, the university does not belong to a strong BCS conference such as the Big 12. The Cougars, the city of Houston, and the state of Texas deserve better," it reads.

You can read the full letter on the Houston Chronicle's website.

If we're talking on-field product, there's not going to be any arguments coming from my direction. I suspect that's also the case in Lubbock and Stillwater, whose teams suffered losses to Houston in 2009. Baylor coach Art Briles also came to Waco via Houston. Houston saw its share of big-time football as members of the Southwest Conference up until 1995, when it became a member of Conference USA after the formation of the Big 12.

But if we've learned nothing throughout this realignment saga, it's that the on-field product is far from the most important consideration.

If it was, TCU might already be a member. But neither the Horned Frogs nor Houston, with its 32,000-seat stadium, should count on ever becoming a member.

Oklahoma State athletic director Mike Alden estimated that a new member would have to bring with it $15 million in value. It's not Houston's fault its probably the second-most popular team in Houston. If the Big 12 South had left for the Pac-10, both TCU and Houston might have ended up in a new Big 12.

That didn't happen, to the detriment of Houston's future in a BCS conference.

"I don't quit," State Rep. Garnet Coleman told the Houston Chronicle. "I don't start something I'm not going to finish. If I didn't think this was a worthy endeavor, I wouldn't have started it. This is the beginning of this effort, not the end."

(On a final note, any discussion of Arkansas in the Big 12 is wasted breath. The only possible scenario in which the Hogs might leave is if someone can convince Jerry Jones or some other crazed moneymaker to guarantee the Hogs make the same amount of cash as the SEC, no matter how much more it makes than the Big 12. Even though everyone's holding hands right now, you might recall, there are stabler leagues than the Big 12. For starters, the SEC. So you'd probably also have to guarantee that if the Big 12 loses another member or breaks up, Arkansas gets automatic entry back into the SEC. So, if you guys know anyone who can set all that up, let me know and we can start talking about the Hogs rejoining their Texan rivals.)

The wait is over.

Many of you -- hundreds? thousands? -- have asked me to review your proposals for Big Ten divisions and to offer my own. It's truly amazing how much interest this part of expansion garners. Even before Dec. 15, I received hundreds of e-mails not only proposing new members to the Big Ten, but outlining how the divisions would set up. It must be the fantasy sports aspect in all of this.

OK, let's get started.

Note: This is all based on the Big Ten remaining a 12-team league with Nebraska as the only new addition. These divisions apply to football only, so don't start crying about basketball or other sports. There's no need for divisions when you have conference tournaments.

OBJECTIVES

There's no perfect model to divisions, and someone is going to be upset no matter what. But it's important to identify some criteria.

• Competitive balance. I can't stress this enough, but as commissioner Jim Delany said Friday in Lincoln, competitive balance is the top priority in determining divisions. There are lessons to be learned from the Big 12, which shifted its power to the South division and made the league championship game weaker. The Big Ten wants its title game to mean something. Recent history certainly matters when evaluating programs, but so does long-term history.
• Rivalries (old and new). The Big Ten is nothing without its rivalries, but not every rivalry will be saved unless the league goes to an 11-game round robin schedule (not happenin'). It's also important to be forward thinking and project new rivalries that not only appeal to the two fan bases, but to casual fans and to national audiences.
• National appeal. You've seen me write a lot about teams that "move the needle." Certain teams have national appeal, and certain teams don't. That's just the way it is. A league needs to address this in divisions and ensure it has as many opportunities as possible to showcase its product nationally. You want to get the ABC Saturday night game as often as possible.

(Read full post)

Let it be known that I'll have no objections if the Big Ten ends its expansion study tomorrow.

The Big Ten already improved itself with the addition of Nebraska, and a 12-team structure provides the chance to have a championship game while maintaining the intimacy of a league built on long-standing rivalries. If commissioner Jim Delany and the Big Ten presidents and chancellors decide 12 is enough, so be it. I'll go back to blogging about actual football, and we'll all survive.

But the Big Ten says it will continue to examine expansion for the next year or so, and Delany could "act and act again," he said earlier this month.

So here's some advice to the league: If Phase 2 of expansion becomes a reality, make recruiting a top priority.

Nebraska adds a lot to the Big Ten: great football tradition, great fans, a program that matters nationally. But what Nebraska doesn't bring is a new area rife with recruits. According to an in-depth study by SI.com, the state of Nebraska produced only 43 BCS-conference players between 2004-08.

The Big Ten's recent recruiting challenges have been well documented, and Delany has listed the shifting population to the south as a driving force for the expansion push. The Big Ten wants alums, but more importantly, it wants access to recruits.

Texas obviously would have been a great addition for recruiting. Every Big Ten team spends some time in the Lone Star State looking for prospects. But the Longhorns aren't leaving the Big 12.

So where should the Big Ten look to improve its recruiting? Here are two possibilities:

Rutgers: Besides its location near the nation's top media market -- a potential huge boost for the Big Ten Network -- Rutgers would help the Big Ten get a better foothold in New Jersey, a very good state for high school prospects. Plenty of Big Ten programs already recruit in New Jersey, including Penn State and Wisconsin (primarily during Barry Alvarez's tenure). Having a permanent presence in the Garden State would boost Big Ten recruiting efforts there.

Maryland: The Washington D.C. and Baltimore markets appeal to the Big Ten Network, but the real benefit here could come in recruiting. Penn State has plucked top prospects from Maryland for many years, and Illinois built its recruiting success in 2006 and 2007 on a pipeline to Washington D.C. that landed players like Arrelious Benn and Vontae Davis. By adding the University of Maryland, the Big Ten would have a greater chance to reel in recruits from the state and the Beltway.

Again, the Big Ten doesn't need to add any more teams. But if there's a move to be made, it must be strategic and keep recruiting very much in mind.

Now that the expansion rumblings have subsided for the time being, many pundits are determining winners and losers from a wild few weeks in college sports.

Although I don't see this issue in the same way I see a game or a season -- you need more time to determine success or failure -- I've been keeping track of the expansion scorecards out there.

Here are a few viewpoints of where the Big Ten and its new member, Nebraska, stack up:

Colleague Bruce Feldman: Calls Nebraska the No. 3 winner in expansion ... "The Big 12 never felt right for the Cornhuskers. Sure, NU had won big at times in the league, but clearly this had been the Longhorns' league in terms of clout, recently. UT was the biggest shot-caller. Husker brass reportedly always resented that. Now, the tradition-rich Husker program is moving to a more stabile league with much better academics across the board and is a better fit geographically. NU does have 24 Texans on its roster, which is quite a lot, but this should open up the Big Ten recruiting turf more to Nebraska, which only has seven players from those states."

SI.com's Stewart Mandel: "The Big Ten will continue to hold out for its ever-elusive dream girl, Notre Dame, but in the meantime, it quite seamlessly added one of the most prestigious programs in the sport to an already stable league. Nebraska, a big winner itself, got out from under the rule of the Texas-Texas A&M-Oklahoma triumvirate while joining a new set of 11 colleagues with which it already shares much in common academically and geographically."

The Indianapolis Star: "While the Pac-10 added Colorado and its subpar football program, the Big Ten added one of the nation's elite in Nebraska. That's a win for the league, which can now stage a football championship game and earn more money. Jim Delany usually wins and he's not done chalking up victories. ... The Huskers are winners because they get away from evil Texas and its power hungry ego. Sad to lose the rivalry with Oklahoma but that's a small price to exit an uneven partnership in the Big 12 where the rich just made more money than every other school. Nebraska has found a home for a long time in the Big Ten."

The Sporting Blog's Brian Cook: Calls Nebraska a winner in expansion ... "They've extracted themselves from an abusive relationship and now find themselves in a football conference approximately the equal of the one they left minus the revenue imbalance and plus many millions of dollars. Also, Big Ten membership should gradually improve Nebraska's academic reputation." ... Puts Big Ten in category of Folks Not Quite Sure How They Feel ... "Nebraska is a fine addition for football and various other non-revenue sports but is terrible at basketball and hardly expands the reach of the Big Ten Network, which will now be on TV in the nation's 38th most populous state and possibly the Dakotas. That's not nothing, but it's not much, either. The Big Ten's divisions figure to be awkwardly non-geographic and possibly unbalanced, and meanwhile they've filled that precious 12th slot with a team that is Not Notre Dame."

The New York Post's Lenn Robbins: Calls Big Ten a winner ... "You get the feeling if Jim Delany took up chess, he'd be a grandmaster in about a week. Created a near panic when he uttered the word, "expansion.'' The Big Ten added just one team but what a team -- Nebraska." ... Also calls Nebraska a winner ... "Out of the Texas-dominated Big 12, where its rivalry with Oklahoma was not respected, and into the Big Ten. Already the fourth-most profitable program in college football (Texas, Notre Dame, Penn State), Big Red to operate in the Big Black."

The Austin American-Statesman's Cedric Golden: Calls Big Ten a loser ... "Nebraska coming in was a big deal for commissioner Jim Delany, who had to believe two super conferences -- his own Big Ten and the Pac-10 -- could run the Big 12 out of business and cripple the Big East in football. Now, only landing Notre Dame can make this thing a success for the Big Ten." ... Calls Nebraska AD Tom Osborne a winner ... "The Nebraska athletic director wasn't happy with his school's standing in the Big 12, so he left. The Huskers are in a better situation now."

From looking at these and other assessments, Nebraska earns a big "W" and the Big Ten earns a little "w."

It's hard for a lot of folks both regionally and nationally to view this as a major success for the Big Ten because neither Texas nor Notre Dame have been added to the league. But for Nebraska, even though the Big 12 is staying together, the move is being seen as an excellent one.

From many perspectives, college football realignment looks like one big, shameless money grab. Heads from Texas and the Big 12 did their best to challenge that idea while answering questions from the media on Tuesday.
"There was no single issue that was a tipping point, this is a long-term affiliation," president Bill Powers said Tuesday morning in front of 14 video cameras and more than 50 reporters, eschewing the idea that money was the only motivator. He later pointed to the well-being of student-athletes and existing rivalries as reasons to stay, in addition to the academic benefits. "All things considered, this was not just one item or another. It's what is the most comfortable and best fit for the University of Texas. And our view, after going through all of that and giving it very careful consideration, is the new formation of the Big 12."
Said commissioner Dan Beebe later:

"Another inaccuracy is it's all about money and all of that that's been reported. Certainly resources are very important to provide the opportunities for the student-athlete...but a strong, strong consideration that I think went into the decisions by the institutions to remain in association with these schools is the fact that college athletics is very much a regionally supported endeavor, and it would be a great travesty for this part of the country if its major institutions located with conferences that aren't even in this region.

Agreed. Money's not the only consideration. There's no doubt that you don't want athletes getting back from away games at 6:30 with classes kicking off in 90 minutes. And ideally, fans would be able to attend at least a few away games, and hopefully all, within reason. And yes, the long-standing rivalries matter, too.

But money is the only reason any of those things matter. Without a high quality of life for your primary product, you lose high-quality talent. That means less winning. That means less money.

Without familiar opponents, you lose passion. That means lower TV ratings, and you know where that's headed.

Oregon has been a better team than Texas A&M over the past five years. On paper, that's an attractive matchup. But neither fan base is going to get as excited as they would for a Texas A&M-Texas game. Those rivalries may have never truly materialized in a Pac-16, and in the short term, you might find an apathetic fan base, even if the evidence inside the stadium insists otherwise.

Texas made the safe decision. They don't have any guaranteed money or guaranteed conference members, but they got enough assurance to feel "very confident" they'll be happy with both moving forward.

Beebe, Powers, Dodds and whoever else can deny money is the only consideration all they want. Everyone still knows the bottom line will always be the bottom line.