So let's just say the Pac-10 will end up annexing six teams from the Big 12, and the new conference -- Pac & Biggie, as I would call it -- would need to begin working on basketball scheduling.
That true round-robin Pac-10 coaches have touted in the past would be no more unless there were interest in squeezing in a 30-game conference schedule. Yeah, 30.
Even a scenario where two eight-team divisions play home and road games within the division and play the other teams once would result in 22 conference games. Coaches currently in the Pac-10 already know the 18 games they already play are an awful lot.
So former San Francisco Chronicle college writer Jake Curtis over on his blog has ideas about best-case solutions to all this, and well, it's not a pretty sight.
The Super 16 conference might put all 16 teams in one big division, like the Big East. So let’s start with the premise that every conference team would play each conference opponent at least once. That’s 15 games right there, enough for an entire conference season. The ACC and Big 12 play only 16 conference games now. Where games are played would be critical. If, for example, Cal plays UCLA and Texas at home and Oregon and Washington State on the road, it has a chance to sweep all four. If the sites were reversed, a split is probably the best-case scenario.
A more likely scenario is that the conference would keep an 18-game conference schedule, which means playing three conference opponents twice. That’s what the Big East does. Playing Texas twice is a lot different from playing Washington State twice.
Producing a schedule or format that is fair will be a chore, probably impossible.