The Big Twelve has announced that they will not be expanding, despite the substantial cost and effort sunk into this process by both the expansion candidates and the conference itself.

In the end, none of the final eleven candidates could get the required eight out of ten votes needed. What this failure points to is the difference between the concept of having a twelve team conference and finding the proper two additional teams. While there was enough support for at least looking at expansion, that is not the same thing as getting enough support behind two specific schools. Particular candidates have their advantages and disadvantages, and these can scuttle the candidacy of all schools even if the idea of a twelve team conference has enough support.

So what happens now? For the time being, nothing. After a few years, I expect another attempt, and it, too, is likely to fail, as little significant change will happen. Perhaps yet another attempt will be made after that, but soon the conference will be up against the end of their grant of rights and the TV contracts of many conferences.

This is a far less predictable time than those we have been through. Some argue that there will be four conferences of 16, 18, or even 20 teams. But remember, while you can make those moves on paper, the actual teams have to be appealing to actual conferences. The Big Twelve may have wanted to go to twelve members today, but they did not, and not for a lack of candidates. No school looked to be a good enough addition, and so they stayed at ten.

Numbers, alone, are not incentive enough, then. What is? In the end, income and academics. You might be tempted to add in tradition and competitiveness. However, the latter is ultimately reflected in income: the stronger the team, the more desirable they are for various forms of media. As for tradition: out of all FBS schools, one with the greatest tradition is Army; yet they are rarely considered a candidate for Power conference membership. Tradition that does not correspond to fanbase is irrelevant.

Media, however, are changing. Every Thursday Twitter sends me an email reminding me that I can watch that night's NFL game on their platform -- something unbelievable just a few years ago. When I watch college football, it is usually on my tablet (where I'm writing this now!). Furthermore, streaming games levels the playing field remarkably. It is just as easy for me to watch Purdue, USF, or my alma mater, the University of Indianapolis, a Division II school. As more and more people stop subscribing to cable, streaming rights and options will become more significant. It isn't enough anymore to simply sign a media contract with ESPN, Fox, or CBS. Now you need to know how people are going to watch you. If USF isn't available for me to stream, UIndy probably is -- with the stream produced by a local Indianapolis broadcaster, or their conference, cheaply enough that they don't need high viewership to get ads to cover their costs.

This is important because at some point in the near future media contracts are going to be focused more and more on streaming as how eyeballs will see the product, and therefore the ads as well. As such, the conference which gets the best contract will increasingly be the conference which has the schools whose fanbases will show up for online streaming. While a lot of these will be the traditional powers, there is no way to predict just yet how these schools will shake out, and with it which schools will be the most desirable.

Therefore the next round of conference realignment will look different, as conferences worry less about traditional followings and more about online reach. Some schools will be in a surprisingly good position. Others will find themselves unexpectedly unwanted. At this point, I don't think we can be certain what schools will be in which group.