It was supposed to be the end of the world as we know it.
Six prominent college athletic programs bolted from their current conference to start another. Some analysts declared it the death knell for football, even going so far as to label it "the end of civilization.''
The schools?
Nebraska, Iowa State, Oklahoma, Kansas, Kansas State and Missouri.
The year?
It was 1928, when those schools left the Missouri Valley to create the Big Six.
That old newspaper clipping brings a chuckle from Bill Hancock.
As someone with 30 years of work in the Big Eight, the NCAA and the Bowl Championship Series, Hancock has heard the declarations of radical change — similar to today's conference realignment drumbeat — many times before.
"What surprises me about this,'' the BCS executive director said, "is that people think this is the first time this has ever happened.''
It's not, by a long shot.
In the past 20 years, at least one FBS football program has changed leagues or divisional status in 17 of those years. Other moves already are scheduled in 2012, 2013 and 2014.
Oh, but conference realignment is far different this time, according to the instant-analysis posse.
Super-conferences are imminent. This will lead to the football playoff that "everybody'' wants. Sure, collateral damage would be done to the NCAA basketball tournament. Just keep an eye out for a large-school breakaway from the NCAA. It's coming fast.
For your health and safety, don't ingest that much baloney in one sitting — especially the extra-thick slice labeled "football playoff.''
"One of the great mistakes that columnists are making in this,'' Hancock said, "is letting wishful thinking overcome reality when they think about super-conferences leading to a playoff.
"It's wrong. And it's wrong because the same presidents who are supportive of the current system are going to be supportive of it no matter what conference they are in.''
The same advice goes for swallowing the idea that March Madness loses favor if only the big conferences are involved.
Hancock said he doesn't believe the tourney will ever be big schools only, but he agreed to "play along with the hypothetical.''
"The tournament would still be magic,'' he said. "It would not be magic in the same way because you wouldn't have the Coppin States beating whoever. But you would still have the bracket and the excitement of March.''
The multi-billion-dollar value from television would survive, too.
"The dirty little secret about the tournament is the value is not Butler,'' Hancock said. "The value still is Kentucky and Duke and UCLA. TV doesn't think about Butler.''
A handful of college power brokers I interviewed the past few days unanimously feel a disconnect exists between much of the current commentary on conference realignment and the views held by the CEOs who rule on such topics.
Their thoughts:
• Hancock: "I don't hear serious talk about breaking away from the NCAA. I don't think schools want to break away from the NCAA as much as they want realistic rules that apply to their situation.''
• Barry Alvarez, Wisconsin athletic director the past seven years: "The 16-team thing has been thrown out a lot. But our commissioner says time and time again that he's very comfortable with 12.''
• Britton Banowsky, Conference USA commissioner the past nine years and a conference administrator for 22 years: "Things are evolving. But I don't think things are necessarily evolving to a bigger-is-better model. You could see the pendulum start to swing back again.''
• Karl Benson, Western Athletic Conference commissioner the past 17 years: "Could we have four 16-team conferences? Yes. But I don't think we're anywhere near that. I'm 59 years old. I hope to go to 65, and I don't expect to see it in my career.''
And, Benson added, even if one or two BCS leagues grow to 16, nothing says the others will follow.
"I don't think the conferences are linked in those decisions,'' he said. "I don't sense any strategic effort to do it collectively.''
Remember, folks, these are the conclusions of people who are paid to talk regularly with the decision-makers, not the ramblings of those who fill blogs and radio airtime.
If you want to know how a 16-team conference might operate, Benson is your go-to guy because it was his job to run one from 1996 to 1998.
But he readily admits it wasn't done the right way.
In early 1994, Benson was a few months away from being hired at the WAC when that 10-team league started its expansion. The presidents thought 12 was a good number. But with the Southwest Conference breaking up, membership grew to 16 before figuring out how to stop.
"There wasn't a plan,'' Benson said. "There was no scheduling plan or revenue model.
"This may have been the first time a group of presidents really dictated a major decision about a conference. The athletic directors felt they were out of the loop.''
What's the blueprint now for making a 16-team league work?
"There has to be a plan to start,'' Benson said. "There has to be total acceptance and buy-in from the current membership. You can't have 8-4 or 10-2 votes.
"And there has got to be enough money to satisfy the existing members.''
Despite several on-the-field and in-the-arena successes, the 16-team WAC failed in all three categories. Said Benson: "It collapsed upon itself.''
The Pac-12's sudden decision last week not to pursue expansion likely is proof that Benson's checklist applies. The CEOs from Colorado and Utah didn't want to get stuck in a division on the west side of the Rocky Mountains with Texas and Oklahoma schools.
That lack of buy-in, plus Commissioner Larry Scott finally getting a bellyful of Texas' arrogance, put Pac-12 expansion in park.
Yet realignment will forever bubble near the surface. The track record is too strong, and the human desire for stability bleeds over into where a school wants to hang its helmet.
"I see what people are doing. You have to fend for yourself,'' Wisconsin's Alvarez said. "When the music stops, you better have a seat.''
In the Big Ten, that seat is pretty comfortable right now.
"It's nice to be on the outside looking in on all this, and feeling good about where you are,'' Alvarez said. "That makes Nebraska look pretty smart right now, doesn't it?''
Smart, with some good fortune mixed in. Nebraska will savor both, just as it did when it made another big move 83 years ago.
Contact the writer:
402-444-1024, lee.barfknecht@owh.com
Copyright ©2012 Omaha World-Herald®. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, displayed or redistributed for any purpose without permission from the Omaha World-Herald.
