...of conference realignment (and it seems to be for the time), let's examine the winners and losers:
The Clear Winners: The Big Ten, Nebraska, Texas, TAMU, Oklahoma
These are the groups that came out of all the expansion hoopla better than how they went in, and they know it.
The Big Ten got its 12th member, a probable championship game, and a school that in terms of academics, athletics, tradition, and TV ratings is a great fit and a boost to the league.
Nebraska ended up a winner too, in terms of both money and getting out from Texas' oppressive rule. Also, they'll join the CIC, which will be a huge boost to the school academically.
Texas got exactly what it wanted: a conference full of loyal subjects and big time money.
Oklahoma and Texas A&M may not have gotten everything they wanted, but they do come out with more money, and didn't have to leave for the more competitive pastures of the SEC to do it.
The Clear Losers: The Big 12
The Big 12 loses its conference championship game (NCAA rules state a league must have 12 members) and a lot of credibility, even if the efforts to save the league in some form were eventually successful. Perhaps the Big 12 will add Houston or Tulsa or Rice or someone of that ilk to salvage the conference championship game, but trading Nebraska for Tulsa is a clear loss regardless.
You lost, even if it doesn't feel like it or you don't know it yet: Colorado, Notre Dame
Colorado left a league it had a great deal of history with for less money in the Pac-10, a league that still doesn't have the requisite membership for a conference championship game. It probably will soon, but they get a giant Fail anyways.
Notre Dame is still making less money from television than Northwestern and Vanderbilt. That sentence never gets old. Also, with the prospect of 2 more superconferences around than when their deal was last negotiated (assuming the Pac-10 and Big 12 gobble the requisite number of mid-majors, which will lead to greater competition for TV time), combined with more of the same on the field, does ND really think their TV deal with NBC will be better next time around?
You didn't lose, even if you don't feel great right now: Missouri, The Pac-10
Mizzou, you're basically in the exact same spot you were 12 months ago. You weren't unhappy about your lot then, why would you be now? I know you were led to believe that the Big Ten was a done deal, and that sucks, but in the end, you're no worse off than you ever were.
As for the Pac-10, you gained Colorado and will probably add Utah, BYU, or some other Western mid-major and get your conference championship game, which will add money, and in terms of academics and competition, basically amount to par for the course in your league. You missed out on Texas, but Texas, if you couldn't tell by this whole process, is a total jerk, and was making you take Oklahoma State and Texas Tech too. Even then you know they didn't want equal revenue sharing.
The jilted and confused: The SEC
Apparently Texas A&M would rather get treated like garbage by Texas, for less money, than go for a huge win-win and join the SEC. Texas A&M is like the woman who chose her poor, abusive husband over the suave billionaire who promised her happiness. It must be confusing and a little insulting. For what it's worth, SEC, you were too good for her anyway.
Remarkably unscathed: Big East
Wait, wasn't the Big Ten supposed to absolutely raid this league? Or wasn't the ACC supposed to do the same after the SEC raided it? Didn't Troy Nunes is an Absolute Magician tear the conference commish apart because the league was being destroyed and he stood by and did nothing? The Big East was by far the weakest prey of any league, and has a handful of desirable members, and it remains intact? HOW DID THIS HAPPEN?