Expansion fiasco

With all the talk of possible NCAA conference expansion, I figured I'd chime in. To put it bluntly I think this is a mistake. First off the NCAA has created this problem themselves by instituting the rule that conferences must have 12 or more teams to have a conference championship game in football. As long as you have 10 teams then I see no reason there could not be a championship game anyway. I make no accusation that forming so called super-conferences would be the destruction of college football, but I do think it would only be a money grab and serve no real purpose to the institutions that join these mega conferences other than more funding in a never ending arms race.

First off, the pilaging of other conferences seems just that. Theft. The idea that a conference such as the Big 10 can just go into other established conferences and make offers to their teams just seems wrong to me. Yet, I suppose it's that way in business. No loyalty. I can understand going to smaller conferences and making these sorts of offers. It would even make sense to look into some of those schools. But the fact that this idea is only about football is even more astounding. With the exception of a school like Missouri, which to be honest has little football pedigree other than a few reasonably decent seasons the past few years, all of the schools in question for Big 10 expansion are football schools.

Secondly, nobody can agree as to where it would all end if anything were to happen. Some people think the Big 10 would be happy if only Notre Dame came within their fold. How does this make sense? Why not grab all the teams they could. Take every single team that's been mentioned. Get the super ratings power in Notre Dame. Expand the network into the deep midwest by poaching Nebraska, secure midwestern media hotspots of St. Louis and K.C. by enticing Missouri (who has felt slighted by the Big 12 ever since the conference's inception), move into the New York market by grabbing Rutgers. It's all about making money off the Big Ten Network so why would stopping at Notre Dame make sense?

Ah, but then the dominoes fall. The Big 12, having lost two of it's biggest pieces from the north division would have to look west for help. Either make a grab for TCU and perhaps Colorado State or form a mega-conference with the Pac-10 and it's California money. The SEC then makes a push to keep it's football powerhouse status by offering a spot to Florida State and/or Miami. Perhaps conferences completely disappear? The ACC could be swallowed whole by the SEC with the crumbs going to other conferences. Maybe the Big East is destroyed or forced to join forces with Conference USA to keep its vital signs alive. The Mountain West could be absorbed into the Big12/Pac-10. There seems to be no stopping that train and nobody seems to be all that bothered.

There just seems to be so much wrong with these super conferences. How can you really decide a conference champion if the conferences get so big that there might not be enough games to even play everyone in your own division? What about rivalries? Yes games could still be scheduled for non-con, but wouldn't a Missouri-Kansas matchup with no Big 12 importance lose a little luster? What about Michigan-Ohio State? Is it fair to have them play every single year just to keep their rivalry when you could have as many as 14 other teams in the conference? What becomes of the leftovers? When the Big 12 was formed, all the teams from the Southwest Conference were taken, except for Arkansas, which got a pretty good deal in joining the SEC. The chatter as it is leaves so many teams out in the cold that it almost seems these mega conferences would be perfectly fine with the destruction of some of these programs since they would have no where to go.

In the end, I agree that something is probably going to happen. I don't like it at all and I see no benefit to it. It's not the same as holding onto the 64 team basketball tournament. For that you can argue that it hasn't had much tradition and is progress. With this, there is no benefit to everyone involved.

- LeBron James: Where will he go? I still wonder what all the hubub is about. So much is being made about King James' inability to win the big one so far. Michael Jordan did not win right away and he had to overcome plenty of adversity before he did. Plus, in Cleveland, LeBron really has no real #2. People can make the case of Antwain Jameson or Mo Williams all they want. Magic had Kareem and vice versa. Bird had McHale. Thomas had Dumars. Russel had a pretty stacked Celtics squad all the time. Jordan had Pippen. The point is that Lebron doesn't have those. He has talented players, but Mo Williams or Varejao or Big Z or Shaq at the end of his career is not comparable to Pippen or Dumars or McHale.

With that said, most people still wonder if he'll go. Being a Chicago Bulls fan, I love the fact that my team is mentioned as a front runner to get one of the best players in the league. But I am a loyalist both to my teams and in the belief that some players should stay in one place. Michael Jordan is and forever shall be a Bull, no matter how many Wizards jerseys may be in a warehouse somewhere. Magic was only a Laker. Bird was only a Celtic. To be honest I think James should only be a Cavalier.

If he goes then where makes the most sense is the next question. Most think New York. No offense, but that's dumb (which means it'll happen). The Knicks are horrid. Even if you get James and Bosh together that team is a mid seed in the playoffs. Going to New York would be about nothing but money and the lifestyle. Next up is Chicago. I agree with ESPN's Bob Ryan that this makes the most basketball sense. I heard on the radio that Chicago doesn't make sense because Cleveland is a better team and the Bulls were the 8 seed. Take LeBron off the Cavs and they don't even make the playoffs. Put Lebron on a team with Rose, Deng, Noah and the slew of other talent the Bulls have and you have a great team. Lebron gives the Bulls power and that's what they don't have. The Bulls need a center, but LeBron gives them the strength even if not the height. The question I have is whether Rose is the next Iverson and could take the back seat role. The Heat are mentioned as well. This would be a power tandem of James and Wade. Better idea than the Knicks and Cavs, but again, can two mega stars co-exist outside of a national team setting?

Ultimately, I think LeBron statys or goes to the Knicks. The Cavs allow him to build his own legacy even if he doesn't win the big one. New York is, like I said, for the lifestyle. He'll never win there either but it won't be looked down upon so much as it is in dreary Cleveland, where they haven't won anything since the 60's.

Random Thoughts:

- What's up with the Eastern Conference in the NHL? Not only would the St. Louis Blues have been a playoff shoe-in in that conference, but the 7 and 8 seeds make the conference finals? What an interesting juxtaposition to have the 1 vs. 2 in the west and 7 vs. 8 in the east.

- The World Cup is a little less than a month away and I'm getting a little excited. I was disappointed that the US roster did not include Charlie Davies, especially after hearing that it seems his european club had a lot to do with it by misinforming the US team. Good to see Edson Buddle get a chance after his hot start in the MLS though.

- It's going to be a long, but hopefully interesting offseason for the St. Louis Blues. Many questions. Will the team go after offense or defense in the free agent market? I personally hope offense, since there are plenty of good defenseman in the system like Ian Cole, Alex Pietrangelo and Jonas Junland. Will the team just re-sign Chris Mason or try to trade for a hopeful upgrade or sign someone. To be honest I'm a little tired of Mason. When he's on, he's really on but when he's not there are just too many back breaking soft goals. The best options, unfortunately, would require a trade. I see Carey Price of Tim Thomas as the best options. I haven't heard any solid rumors on Thomas, but I can't see Boston holding onto two starting goaltenders now that they seem to have shifted the job to Raask. Only time will tell.

That about wraps it up for this post. Remember these are just my own thoughts and it's just my opinion...but I'm right.