As cultural and geographic factors erode in determining conference affiliation (Texas and A&M neither geographically or culturally fits in the PAC-10), have we started down the road to one "Superconference" consisting of only the richest teams in college football? Isn't the logical next step to the expansion game assembling the 20-30 richest programs and closing the doors to the rest?
As a potentially unintended consequence of the conference expansion game, something that will be exacerbated as the number of viable "contenders" decreases, the distribution of talent across teams will equalize. Given that very few 4 or 5 star players attend schools on the "outside", and fewer "inside" teams are available, each of the "inside" teams will have more star players to choose from. As the players disperse to different schools so as to ensure playing time, the talent differential between teams significantly decreases. While this may promote a competitive league, it also looks a lot like the NFL. College football is played by the same set of rules, but is great for its differences from the NFL. Anything that makes CFB more like the NFL in terms of culture and game play, should be carefully considered.
Finally, as a very random aside, if the best athletes in the US played soccer, we'd all be reminisching today about National Hero and Great Patriot Charles Woodson, the unbeatable goalie.
