The prospect of money over quality is once again ruining college football.  

One year removed from the Big 12’s blue bloods, Oklahoma and Texas, deciding to jump ship for the SEC, USC and UCLA have done the same to the PAC-12, opting to join the Big 10 to secure a bigger bag. The SEC and Big 10 now have sixteen members each and it is theorized that each conference will end up with 20 or more by the time the smoke clears. 

This isn’t the first time realignments of this nature have occurred in college football, but the ones that occurred in the early 2010s made more sense for the overall structure of college football. It gave teams that had consistent success in the Big East and at the Group of Five level a better chance at a title, even if it eventually resulted in the demise of the Big East.

But the recent shifts have provided two conferences with unfair hands and doomed the rest.  

When you think about college football from a quality standpoint like most fans of the sport do, neither move makes sense. Obviously, it makes sense financially, with the SEC and Big 10 bringing in more revenue than the Big 12 and PAC-12, but that isn’t what fans of the sport care about.  

Regarding the Big 12, the conference hasn’t had this many contenders since the late 2000s. Sure, Oklahoma won every Big 12 title from 2015-2020, but teams like Iowa State, Oklahoma State and Baylor have emerged as teams that could challenge them for the conference throne, with Baylor taking claim of it in 2021. Each of the aforementioned teams and Texas have won a New Year’s Six bowl since 2018.  

While the PAC-12 has seen better days, they have had playoff contenders since the playoff’s inception, and the conference is no longer the USC/Oregon show that it had been in the 2000s and 2010s. USC and Oregon have had their moments of course, but teams like Washington and Utah have shown they could take them down and even surpass them in talent. 

Utah will contend for the playoff if the Utes maintain their trajectory, displaying that they could hang with the nation’s best in a barn-burner Rose Bowl against Ohio State in January. Oregon and Utah each return over half of their starting lineup and the Utes went 10-1 with Cam Rising as their starting quarterback, who is one of the returning players.

But if the Big 12 and PAC-12 continue to lose teams (with Oregon and Washington already expected to leave the latter) and the playoff expansion gets pushed back further, a lot of potential championship contenders will be overlooked in December. The winners of the SEC and Big 10 championships are practically guaranteed a spot and any 11 or 12-1 runner-up will also be considered. 

The best-case scenario for each conference is as follows (this only applies to football): 

SEC 

Additions: Clemson 

Departures: Missouri, Arkansas, Vanderbilt  

ACC 

Additions: Maryland, UCF, West Virginia, Appalachian State, Coastal Carolina

Departures: Clemson, Pittsburgh, Syracuse 

Big 10 

Additions: Cincinnati, Pittsburgh 

Departures: USC, UCLA, Maryland, Rutgers

PAC-12 

Additions: USC, UCLA, BYU, San Diego State, Boise State 

Departures: Colorado 

Big 12 

Additions: Arkansas, Missouri, SMU, UTSA 

For starters, the only 16-team “super” conference this produces is the ACC, with the Big 10, Pac 12 and SEC having fourteen and the Big 12 having… twelve again. In terms of reasoning, I’ll start from the bottom-tier and work my way up.  

Vanderbilt, Colorado, Rutgers, Syracuse and Duke have consistently finished at the bottom of their conferences and could use a change in scenery. This would not be a drop to the FCS like some fans have proposed for Vanderbilt, but a drop to the Group of Five.  

In this scenario, Duke and Vanderbilt could join the Sun Belt or Conference USA and have a better chance to compete while also being in a good spot geographically. Same goes for Colorado moving to the Mountain West and Rutgers and Syracuse moving to the MAC.

West Virginia and Maryland fit better in the ACC geographically and would have a better chance of competing with a slightly lower level of competition. They have enough talent to compete in the Power Five, but the Big 10 has not been kind to the Terrapins and West Virginia has been inconsistent against the Big 12.

I will say the justification for the Mountaineers is more geographical than Maryland’s, as the former has at least been competitive from time to time (as recently as 2018).

Appalachian State and Coastal Carolina recently came out of the FCS and seamlessly transitioned into some of the best teams in the Group of Five. They’ve had success against the Power Five as well.

Appalachian State defeated North and South Carolina in 2019 and narrowly failed to upset a then-ranked Miami team last season. And Coastal Carolina sports a 3-0 record against… Kansas, but it was with an average lead of about 16 points (increasing by the year), and they also took down No. 13 BYU in 2020.

Appalachian State and Coastal Carolina have also developed an interesting matchup history in the Sun Belt, and both teams work geographically, with Appalachian State being closer to the coast than most ACC teams and “coastal” literally being a part of Coastal Carolina’s name.

Liberty could also take a spot in the ACC if another team dropped out, sporting a 2-2 record against the ACC since 2019 with victories over Virginia Tech and Syracuse and a combined deficit of four in their losses. They also took down Coastal Carolina in the 2020 Cure Bowl, and fit the equation geographically.

Now, on to the bigger changes.

The actual Big 12 additions

First, I never liked the Big 12 additions, apart from Houston. BYU, Cincinnati and UCF are all in different regions compared to the rest of the teams in the conference. And there are conferences in their regions that would still suit them in terms of providing better competition.

BYU, along with San Diego State, has proven they can consistently compete with the PAC 12, while not completely dominating them. They had a combined 7-0 record against the conference last season, with San Diego State garnering a 4-1 record against them since 2018 (BYU has a 7-5 record in the same time frame).  

But the key here isn’t just competition. BYU has to travel over 1000 miles for every away opponent except Kansas State and Texas Tech in the Big 12. Meanwhile, they would have an in-state rival in Utah if they joined the PAC-12 and would be close enough to the west coast to where long travel distances would never be a problem.

Boise State needs no introduction, being the most consistent, current member of the Mountain West over the past two decades and constantly mentioned in realignment proposals.

Cincinnati to the Big 10 and UCF to the ACC are also obvious. What’s the point of those teams going to the Big 12 instead?

The UCF-Cincinnati “rivalry” is less than a decade old, UCF is not a level above or below the ACC and would have plenty of interesting matchups there. Plus, Cincinnati could better prove themselves against the deep Big 10, with both teams having in-state matchups (Florida State, Miami and Ohio State) and avoiding long travel distances and differing climates.

That exact justification can be applied to Pittsburgh in the Big 10, as they would get to face Penn State annually and consistently compete against teams that play in snowy conditions like they do.

My preferred Big 12 additions

Regarding my Big 12 additions, they make sense geographically, historically and competitively while further balancing the conferences. Arkansas and SMU were each a part of the Southwest Conference that disbanded in 1996, along with current Big 12 teams in Baylor, TCU and Texas Tech. Adding those teams would re-establish historic matchups while also providing the conference with another contender in the Razorbacks.

SMU might struggle to adjust to the heightened competition, but they deserve the upgrade as much as Houston does and could provide Houston with a temporary rivalry while each team adjusts. Arkansas could immediately contend for a Big 12 title, but it would not be easy (I would personally love to see how Arkansas matches up against Baylor and Oklahoma State).

Texas A&M is the only other SEC team from the Southwest Conference (except for Texas) and has already established deeper rivalries with Alabama and LSU than Arkansas has with any team in the conference.

Missouri is another team that needs a change of scenery. After a successful second and third season in conference, in which they made the SEC Championship and won the Citrus and Cotton Bowls, they have rarely been relevant. The team is less than a decade removed from the Big 12 and would be more competitive there. 

With those additions in mind, they would need one more to round it out to 12. There are not a lot of options that work geographically, but they could go with Colorado (another former member), UTSA or UAB. UTSA has progressed impressively in recent years and UAB has been consistent in Conference USA since their re-establishment in 2015 and their most recent victory came against No. 13 BYU in the Independence Bowl.

The Rest

Did USC and UCLA really leave behind more than 80 years of history to join a conference that’s all the way in the opposite corner of the country? Obviously, this does not make sense geographically, but does it at least make sense in terms of skill level?

 Not right now.

USC has earned just one PAC 12 title since Pete Carroll’s departure in 2010, and UCLA’s last title came in 1998. Neither team has been awful for exceedingly long, contributing a combined six losing records in the last decade, but they have consistently been outmatched by their in-conference foes. They have no justification for joining a better conference, other than how much money they bring to the table.

 They could certainly develop into contenders under proven head coaches (at the college level) in Lincoln Riley and Chip Kelly, but they haven’t done that yet.

A team that has actually warranted a step up in competition is Clemson. They have appeared in six playoffs, four championship games and sport two national championships since 2014. They have consistently been criticized for their conference’s lack of competition despite this and would flourish in the SEC and increase competition in the East.

With the conference no longer having 16 teams, the divisions could easily be adjusted, with Oklahoma and Texas joining the West and Auburn and Clemson joining the East. Clemson obviously resides within the region too, as they are a part of one of the most famous rivalries in college football in the Palmetto Bowl against South Carolina.

The SEC East would immediately improve, no longer being considered inferior to the West. It would not only make SEC football even more entertaining; it would also make the race for the ACC less predictable and therefore, more fun to watch. 

And I mean come on, two Death Valleys on each side of the SEC? LSU and Clemson’s matchup being known as the “Battle for Death Valley?” What could be better than that?