Here's what makes me think Colorado is a legitimate option in this scenario.

1. If Oklahoma joins the Big Ten then another familiar face will help smooth things out. For that matter, Nebraska could use another familiar face.

2. If the B1G can't break into ACC territory right now then Denver and the CO market really makes a great deal of sense. It is at least a growing state as opposed to most of the Midwest/Northeast markets within reach of the B1G.

3. From CU's perspective, if the PAC can't get a handle on things then they're going to be woefully underfunded. The PAC Network has not been successful so they could make quite a bit more in the B1G.

4. While CU does have a lot of alumni in CA, it's not as though they have large roving bands of fans following their team around PAC territory. If CU moved then they could make up for whatever ripples it caused by consistently scheduling West Coast schools in non-conference.

5. More than that, their exposure in the East and Midwest has been reduced to nil. I wouldn't be shocked if Colorado believed in 2010 that they were going to be the first in a line of Big 12 schools to break ranks and create a larger, more robust PAC. It obviously didn't happen that way, but there had to be discussions of this prospect and we all know Texas was trying to lead a squadron over there. I'm not saying that CU doesn't prefer the PAC, but I'm not convinced that their new conference home is doing everything for them that they expected it would.

-Now, I really don't think Notre Dame is an option to move in this scenario. Here are my reasons for that.

1. The ACC offers far superior demographics compared to the B1G. Long term, the Midwest and the Northeast to some degree may have issues. Southern and Mid-Atlantic markets, however, are still growing and providing ND with a fresh new crop of eyeballs. More or less, the B1G wants to take schools in the ACC for essentially the same reason. ND by contrast has had the freedom to move their affiliation rather than hoping schools from the growing regions attach themselves to a different league.

2. ESPN wants it all. I don't think ESPN would give up any access to ND games unless they had to. While the network would love to get greater access to B1G games, they may be able to do it anyway if the BTN loses more steam and/or the exposure on FOX continues to be limited. They've got about 5 more years and they'll be going back to the negotiating table anyway. By that point, ESPN will have several years worth of ESPN+ activity, operational RSNs, and the after effects of the SECN and ACCN being bundled together to add to their selling points. The B1G might come back without requiring favors. In a manner of speaking, I think ND in the ACC is actually a point of leverage for ESPN. ESPN has access to a lot of Midwestern markets without paying the full cost for the B1G. ESPN can say..."Delaney, we don't have to have your full slate to have your markets."

Then again, I'm not sure the B1G would really come back to ESPN in a more expanded role under any circumstances...not while Delaney is in charge anyway.

3. ND could probably make a good bit more money in the B1G, but I'm not sure it would be $200M over the course of a decade. If they go all in on the ACC then that ends up being a decent bump. The bundling of the ACCN and SECN will cause a bump as well. The gap will still be nothing to sneeze at, but I don't think it will quite be that much. I think the reasons that ND has always rebuffed the B1G are wide and varied so I think it will take more than a nice raise to get their attention.

4. The buyout would be significant even if all parties were interested in making it happen. If for no more reason than ND has to get out of that NBC deal...