Tweet
Near the end of this June's realignment madness, when the Big 12's blowup seemed imminent, I was working on a magazine story about where Kansas would land. I had called the Jayhawks "helpless hoopsters in a football world," and it looked as if they'd be the biggest victims of the league-shifting madness. I talked to Kansas Senator Sam Brownback, who was still lobbying folks in Texas to save the Big 12; to the head of the Kansas Board of Regents, whose interest was to keep KU and Kansas State in the same conference; and to a source at the Big East, which I thought was the Jayhawks' most logical, albeit ill-fitting, destination.
The source said that the Big East would, hypothetically, have interest in Kansas and Missouri if they were left stranded. Neither of those teams would've made the Big East significantly better in football, but they would have protected the league from losing its BCS bid if any of its current members defected. From a basketball standpoint, though, those additions would've been monumental, creating an 18-team mega-conference with so much talent that we'd have to speculate whether 11 of them could make the NCAA tournament in a given season.
The source said that the Big East would, hypothetically, have interest in Kansas and Missouri if they were left stranded. Neither of those teams would've made the Big East significantly better in football, but they would have protected the league from losing its BCS bid if any of its current members defected. From a basketball standpoint, though, those additions would've been monumental, creating an 18-team mega-conference with so much talent that we'd have to speculate whether 11 of them could make the NCAA tournament in a given season.
But five months later, on Monday, the Big East did make its football-insulation move, poaching TCU from the Mountain West. And this one comes with no residual benefits for basketball -- other than making DePaul less lonely in the Big East cellar.
2009-10:
TCU Efficiency Ranking: 178
Big East Teams with lower efficiency rankings: 0 (Closest: No. 172 DePaul, No. 156 Rutgers)
2008-09:
TCU Efficiency Ranking: 124
Big East Teams with lower efficiency rankings: 3 (No. 135 South Florida, No. 141 Rutgers, No. 198 DePaul)
2007-08:
TCU Efficiency Ranking: 169
Big East Teams with lower efficiency rankings: 0 (Closest: No. 164 Rutgers, No. 126 St. John's)
2006-07:
TCU Efficiency Ranking: 152
Big East Teams with lower efficiency rankings: 1 (No. 166 Rutgers)
2005-06:
TCU Efficiency Ranking: 229
Big East Teams with lower efficiency rankings: 0 (Closest: No. 162 South Florida, No. 108 St. John's)
TCU Efficiency Ranking: 178
Big East Teams with lower efficiency rankings: 0 (Closest: No. 172 DePaul, No. 156 Rutgers)
2008-09:
TCU Efficiency Ranking: 124
Big East Teams with lower efficiency rankings: 3 (No. 135 South Florida, No. 141 Rutgers, No. 198 DePaul)
2007-08:
TCU Efficiency Ranking: 169
Big East Teams with lower efficiency rankings: 0 (Closest: No. 164 Rutgers, No. 126 St. John's)
2006-07:
TCU Efficiency Ranking: 152
Big East Teams with lower efficiency rankings: 1 (No. 166 Rutgers)
2005-06:
TCU Efficiency Ranking: 229
Big East Teams with lower efficiency rankings: 0 (Closest: No. 162 South Florida, No. 108 St. John's)
Comment