Call it a complex, a curiosity or a downright fear.

Whatever you choose, there’s something about the word “realignment” that grabs my attention like few things on this planet, so much so that I get a little frightened when it’s time to take my car in to balance and rotate the tires.

A little more than four years ago, the word “realignment” rocked the world of college athletics, as schools jumped from conference to conference like a game of musical chairs, sometimes freely and sometimes amid pages and pages and days and days of legal attention.

After a couple of wild summers, things calmed down considerably during the next few years. And even though talk of a changing landscape down the road has continued to be a part of the regular conversation when it comes to college athletics and the current make up of the conferences we know and (used to) love, things have been pretty stable overall, especially compared to the chaos that brought all of this into play in the first place.

At the center of that has been the status of the Big 12. While the Big Ten, SEC, Pac-12 and even the ACC entered into an arms race and tried to stockpile schools the way people preparing for a disaster stockpile food and water, the Big 12 held its ground, determined to prove that after adding TCU and West Virginia to replace Missouri and Texas A&M — the two former Big 12 schools that followed Colorado and Nebraska out the door — it was fine with 10 schools and didn’t need to grow larger to be relevant.

But then last year happened, both Baylor and TCU were left out of the first college football playoff and the idea of expansion, stability and change for the future came roaring back to the forefront for the conference that has seemed to be in a constant of self-evaluation and survival for the past handful of years.

A huge question surrounding the idea of expansion — and probably the biggest reason the Big 12 has yet to do it — centers on the concept that there are really no attractive options that make sharing the revenue pie with two more teams worth it.

In a terrific state-of-the-conference type story, Pete Thamel of SI.com recently talked with a dozen Big 12 sources and examined all of the issues facing the conference, from expansion and which teams might be most attractive to the petitioning of the NCAA for a title game with just 10 teams in football — that vote is January 15, by the way — and the overall vibe of the conference’s future in the changing world of college athletics.

It’s as good of an analysis of the state of the Big 12 as I’ve seen in a long time and 100 percent worth the read for anyone with even the slightest interest in realignment, Big 12 expansion and the conference’s chances for survival.

For those of you who don’t have time to read the story or just aren’t big on clicking on links, here’s a little spoiler: According to Thamel, if the Big 12 were to expand, BYU and Cincinnati seem to have emerged as the top two options.

But the article also lists six other schools Thamel has heard mentioned in expansion talk, including Houston, which, for my money, would be a fantastic addition because of the market and incredible potential the evolving school delivers.