And here we go again...

Man, why couldn't they unearth these conference realignment bombshells back in June and July when nothing was going on?

At least we're assured of having something interesting to talk about over the next few weeks before the start of the season.

Here are a few thoughts on all this. And given that I have zero sources at Texas A&M, Florida State or the SEC, just about everything you see will be prefaced with a "maybe" that underscores the fact that this is mere uninformed speculation and should be treated as such.

So here we go...

-- Maybe this thing with Texas A&M and Florida State has been brewing for some time. In these cut-throat times, you don't get stuff done by waiting to see what happens and then reacting. I wouldn't be surprised if Florida State quietly set this in motion a year ago when realignment-geddon mania hit for the first time.

-- If the Seminoles left, it would undoubtedly be a huge blow. But I'm not convinced it'd be a death blow, at least not right away. The conference could be OK for a while by adding, say, West Virginia or South Florida or whoever. The path to the BCS title game would still be far easier for the ACC's teams than in the big-dog conferences. The problem would be the major discrepancy in revenues that would create a big disadvantage over a period of 5-8 years.

-- Maybe the ACC took this realignment thing seriously a year ago. Or maybe not. If you remember, the conference formed a committee to take a closer look and examine contingency plans. How seriously did they take it, particularly after things appeared to have settled down?

-- Maybe South Carolina has privately voiced opposition to the SEC about Clemson's inclusion. Maybe we're not properly assessing how much Georgia would be opposed to Clemson. The Bulldogs and Tigers don't play regularly in football anymore (a crying shame, if you ask me), but they clash in recruiting all the time. So you could make a strong case that Georgia has a vested interest in minimizing Clemson's profile.

-- Maybe people are making too big a deal of these so-called alliances that would theoretically prevent Florida State (Florida objecting), Georgia Tech (Georgia objecting), Clemson (South Carolina and Georgia objecting), etc. You hear a lot of talk about it, and it makes sense, but are those objections powerful enough to dictate the SEC's decisions?

-- Maybe all this talk about "TV markets" is way overblown, at least in the case of the SEC. My hunch is that the SEC doesn't care nearly as much about markets as simply reinforcing the fact that it's the big kid on the block. The conference is already printing money, already on TV all over the place. Maybe it's more about profile, more about sending a message to the saber-rattling Jim Delany that his conference will never eclipse the SEC.

-- Maybe the SEC wants to stick at 14 ... for now. Or maybe the SEC wants to go ahead and make a splash by going to 16. By nabbing Oklahoma and Oklahoma State, you obliterate one conference (Big 12) while reinforcing your supremacy over all conferences.

LW