Jeff82 said:

---

Question: It's been stated that Oregon has a national following, because of the Nike connection, and therefore they would be attractive to the Big 10, even though they're in a small media market. Are there ratings data to support that?

---

They posted share of the last three seasons. Cal and standford together are much lower than Oregon. Its a few pages ago.

If we are being honest about who we are, Oregon, UCLA and USC owns the Bay Area, if any college teams do. The Bay Area is a trash market for College Sports already, and no one cares about Cal, Furd, SJSU or Devry and ITT Tech. Cal is just a very low quality brand.

It occurs to me that the last time this realignment was happening, Cal was in a relatively good spot, still in the good Tedford years and with a new stadium on the way. I don't think we'd have been one of the "have nots" back then. Now the program is in a bad spot and this is happening at the worst possible time.

LunchTime said:

---

Jeff82 said:

---

Question: It's been stated that Oregon has a national following, because of the Nike connection, and therefore they would be attractive to the Big 10, even though they're in a small media market. Are there ratings data to support that?

---

They posted share of the last three seasons. Cal and standford together are much lower than Oregon. Its a few pages ago.

If we are being honest about who we are, Oregon, UCLA and USC owns the Bay Area, if any college teams do. The Bay Area is a trash market for College Sports already, and no one cares about Cal, Furd, SJSU or Devry and ITT Tech. Cal is just a very low quality brand.

---

People like teams that are good. Cal did well 15 years ago, when we were good. Stanford did well 10 years ago, when they were good.

LunchTime said:

---

Jeff82 said:

---

Question: It's been stated that Oregon has a national following, because of the Nike connection, and therefore they would be attractive to the Big 10, even though they're in a small media market. Are there ratings data to support that?

---

They posted share of the last three seasons. Cal and standford together are much lower than Oregon. Its a few pages ago.

If we are being honest about who we are, Oregon, UCLA and USC owns the Bay Area, if any college teams do. The Bay Area is a trash market for College Sports already, and no one cares about Cal, Furd, SJSU or Devry and ITT Tech. Cal is just a very low quality brand.

---

Few will even notice.

TandemBear said:

---

"Does the Pac 10 try to add Boise, UNLV, Fresno?"

Does it matter? This is probably the direction the Pac will take, but it's a loser. Monetarily, it's no net gain. It signifies the demise of the Pac Athletic Conference, regardless of what mid-majors we add. Decline into obscurity ultimately. Not good. Not good at all from a revenue standpoint.

---

IMO, if there are no further defections from the Pac, the priority order for new members would be:
1. San Diego State
2. UNLV
3. (close to 2, might flip 2 and 3) Boise State
4. (tie) Fresno State, Colorado State

And yes, this would be just making the best of a bad situation. It's not a cure for anything.

But even if the Big Ten says no to every remaining Pac member, some or all of the mountain time zone schools might look at the Big 12. Possibly, the Big 12 is already trying to poach the Arizona schools with messages like, "Hey, if you can't get into the Big Ten, we'd love to have you join the Big 12."

This might cause a few hiccups up north.

Spoke to lawmakers in Washington and Oregon today. There's a movement afoot to emphasize that the public and taxpayers do not want public Pac-12 universities split from each other.

The effort, if successful, would keep OSU-Oregon together and WSU-Washington together.

— John Canzano (@johncanzanobft) July 1, 2022

BearSD said:

---

TandemBear said:

---

"Does the Pac 10 try to add Boise, UNLV, Fresno?"

Does it matter? This is probably the direction the Pac will take, but it's a loser. Monetarily, it's no net gain. It signifies the demise of the Pac Athletic Conference, regardless of what mid-majors we add. Decline into obscurity ultimately. Not good. Not good at all from a revenue standpoint.

---

IMO, if there are no further defections from the Pac, the priority order for new members would be:
1. San Diego State
2. UNLV
3. (close to 2, might flip 2 and 3) Boise State
4. (tie) Fresno State, Colorado State

And yes, this would be just making the best of a bad situation. It's not a cure for anything.

But even if the Big Ten says no to every remaining Pac member, some or all of the mountain time zone schools might look at the Big 12. Possibly, the Big 12 is already trying to poach the Arizona schools with messages like, "Hey, if you can't get into the Big Ten, we'd love to have you join the Big 12."

---

In that scenario I'd support Cal dumping the stadium debt on the Regents and dropping down to D2 in football or dropping it entirely. Donations, ticket sales, and recruiting would fall through the floor.

ducky23 said:

---

Strykur said:

---

This might cause a few hiccups up north.

Spoke to lawmakers in Washington and Oregon today. There's a movement afoot to emphasize that the public and taxpayers do not want public Pac-12 universities split from each other.

The effort, if successful, would keep OSU-Oregon together and WSU-Washington together.

— John Canzano (@johncanzanobft) July 1, 2022

---

And CA lawmakers………????? Bueller?

---

Addressing this would be pure circenses, 'cause with inflation, we cant even get the panem.

Hearing there's confidence in Big Ten circles about Notre Dame and Oregon eventually jumping on board.

— Jeff Ermann (@Jeff_Ermann) July 1, 2022

FYI, same dude who broke news of Maryland to BIG 10

BearSD said:

---

TandemBear said:

---

"Does the Pac 10 try to add Boise, UNLV, Fresno?"

Does it matter? This is probably the direction the Pac will take, but it's a loser. Monetarily, it's no net gain. It signifies the demise of the Pac Athletic Conference, regardless of what mid-majors we add. Decline into obscurity ultimately. Not good. Not good at all from a revenue standpoint.

---

IMO, if there are no further defections from the Pac, the priority order for new members would be:
1. San Diego State
2. UNLV
3. (close to 2, might flip 2 and 3) Boise State
4. (tie) Fresno State, Colorado State

And yes, this would be just making the best of a bad situation. It's not a cure for anything.

But even if the Big Ten says no to every remaining Pac member, some or all of the mountain time zone schools might look at the Big 12. Possibly, the Big 12 is already trying to poach the Arizona schools with messages like, "Hey, if you can't get into the Big Ten, we'd love to have you join the Big 12."

---

UNLV now has to compete with the Raiders in a small market.

San Diego State might make some sense.

However, I am beginning to think the worst option is adding teams to the PAC to get back to 12 or more. We should obviously first try to convince the B10 to form a Pacific pod with us in it. If that fails this round, we should still leave that as an option or leave it open for USC and uCLA to come back. Adding new teams complicates our future.

It is not ideal, but the fall back option should be a smaller PAC that plays a round robin and then plays UCLA, USC and other B1G teams (plus ND?) as OOC games. We need to reaffirm our tie to the Rose Bowl. Push for playoff expansion that emphasizes conference champs to undermine superconferences.

However, the power move for Cal is to be CALIFORNIA and reassert our claim on the entire state. That means energizing our huge SoCal alumni base by playing one game each year in LA, Orange County and or San Diego as CALIFORNIA. Those could be late season Saturday night games that would be too cold in the Bay Area or Pacific Northwest. There are new stadiums now. Give it a bowl like atmosphere. I am sure Oregon wants to still play in SoCal. Play Nortre Dame or BYU every year in LA. Play Navy in San Diego. Invite our local recruits.

perhaps we could convince the BiG to add a Relegation Division. It could include Rutgers, Cal, Minnesota.... and the winner gets to play with the Big Boys the next year.

eastcoastcal said:

---

Hearing there's confidence in Big Ten circles about Notre Dame and Oregon eventually jumping on board.

— Jeff Ermann (@Jeff_Ermann) July 1, 2022

FYI, same dude who broke news of Maryland to BIG 10

---

It will cost ND as they are contractually tied to the ACC if they want to join a football conference. Part of their agreement for all their other teams who play in the ACC

Talked to a media exec that feels the loss of USC & UCLA devalues the P12 in its upcoming TV negotiations to the tune of 15-20 million per team per year

That seems a bit extreme, but if true, there is no collection of teams (B12 or MWC) that would come close to make them whole

— Scott Garrard (@ScottyGZone) July 1, 2022

ducky23 said:

---

Does anyone know what ND makes from their nbc deal and whether it's more/less than what they would potentially get from big10

---

I've seen that with just USC and UCLA, BIG revenue could be as high as $100 million dollars per school. Add Notre Dame to the mix and that # goes up.

Alkiadt said:

---

Oregon is no better off than Cal at this point.

---

Like it or not, Oregon is a national brand in football and they're likely on the B1G short list.

Alkiadt said:

---

eastcoastcal said:

---

Hearing there's confidence in Big Ten circles about Notre Dame and Oregon eventually jumping on board.

— Jeff Ermann (@Jeff_Ermann) July 1, 2022

FYI, same dude who broke news of Maryland to BIG 10

---

It will cost ND as they are contractually tied to the ACC if they want to join a football conference. Part of their agreement for all their other teams who play in the ACC

---

Just with the figures from this thread and some rounding, if ND is getting $35mm right now from their deal with NBC and they're looking at $100mm by jumping to the Big 10, whatever figure their contract with the ACC spells out as their exit fee (even if it's something as ridiculous to us 5-10 years ago like... $100mm?) doesn't seem to be the poison pill they intended it to be. If I were ND I'd do what it takes to join the Big 10. I'm thinking Cal worms its way into the Big 10 along with UW, Oregon, and furd as well and becomes the Rutgers for the western division. Would it make a huge difference if one division has 11 teams and the other has 10 if there isn't a full round-robin for the divisions every year?

philly1121 said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

Alkiadt said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

I feel bad for Wilcox - turned the Oregon job down and now he's stuck in piddly-dink pac-10 (or 8). He will def leave after this year.

---

Oregon is no better off than Cal at this point.

---

absolutely ridiculous take.

Oregon is a high value program. Cal can't win 6 games can't get fans to watch, let alone casuals, and has almost no funding.

Oregon is in a massively better position right now.

---

Exactly. Why would the B1G want us? Academics? Who cares. Rivalries? Against USC? Puhleez. UCLA? From UCLA's perspective - I doubt they even care. Frankly all this talk about a package deal of "if you take ucLa, you have to take us" is absurd. It's like the uglier sister crying to mommy demanding the older hot sister take her to the dance with her. B1G doesn't want us.

---

This is absolutely all true. However, it's in both the regents and the state's best interest to have cal tag along. And they probably have more leverage in this situation than they care to realise. Whether they exert that leverage, however, is doubtful

If the big10 had its choice, they probably have no interest taking cal. But if there was even a little pressure on them that they had to take cal, i honestly don't think they'd care that much. The big10 presidents would like it and it doesn't hurt adding the Bay Area media market.

The more I think about it, I don't think furd is gojng to do it. They aren't under the same financial gun that cal is under. And it just doesn't seem like a furd thing to do. They believe they don't have to kowtow to big money interests. And I just don't see them sending their prized Olympic sport athletes to Timbuktu every week

philly1121 said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

Alkiadt said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

I feel bad for Wilcox - turned the Oregon job down and now he's stuck in piddly-dink pac-10 (or 8). He will def leave after this year.

---

Oregon is no better off than Cal at this point.

---

absolutely ridiculous take.

Oregon is a high value program. Cal can't win 6 games can't get fans to watch, let alone casuals, and has almost no funding.

Oregon is in a massively better position right now.

---

Exactly. Why would the B1G want us? Academics? Who cares. Rivalries? Against USC? Puhleez. UCLA? From UCLA's perspective - I doubt they even care. Frankly all this talk about a package deal of "if you take ucLa, you have to take us" is absurd. It's like the uglier sister crying to mommy demanding the older hot sister take her to the dance with her. B1G doesn't want us.

---

Feels like this is more about you than than college football. Good luck with all that.

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Want to hear a little schadenfreude? Cal would have a tough time traveling to the Big 12 since the state of California has banned travel to those states (minus BYU) ..bwhahahah :cry

---

The university's foundation & donors cover these costs already.

And so all the Olympic sports have to fly eastward, multiple times in conference, to play games? Nightmare.

I can see it the other way - fly out west once or twice per season.

Aside: could these teams stay out east for 10 days, and take classes on Zoom?

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Want to hear a little schadenfreude? Cal would have a tough time traveling to the Big 12 since the state of California has banned travel to those states (minus BYU) ..bwhahahah :cry

---

There's an exception for athletic departments. Utah is also on that list FYI and they're in the PAC.

This would also be an issue for UCLA btw.

ducky23 said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

Alkiadt said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

I feel bad for Wilcox - turned the Oregon job down and now he's stuck in piddly-dink pac-10 (or 8). He will def leave after this year.

---

Oregon is no better off than Cal at this point.

---

absolutely ridiculous take.

Oregon is a high value program. Cal can't win 6 games can't get fans to watch, let alone casuals, and has almost no funding.

Oregon is in a massively better position right now.

---

Exactly. Why would the B1G want us? Academics? Who cares. Rivalries? Against USC? Puhleez. UCLA? From UCLA's perspective - I doubt they even care. Frankly all this talk about a package deal of "if you take ucLa, you have to take us" is absurd. It's like the uglier sister crying to mommy demanding the older hot sister take her to the dance with her. B1G doesn't want us.

---

This is absolutely all true. However, it's in both the regents and the state's best interest to have cal tag along. And they probably have more leverage in this situation than they care to realise. Whether they exert that leverage, however, is doubtful

---

They very likely have zero leverage. USC is the big get, UCLA is a nice to have. The regents very well could be looking at the option of having one UC hit the big payday, or having zero, because the B1G could just take someone else.

There is no D2 football, there's FCS.

LTbear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

Alkiadt said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

I feel bad for Wilcox - turned the Oregon job down and now he's stuck in piddly-dink pac-10 (or 8). He will def leave after this year.

---

Oregon is no better off than Cal at this point.

---

absolutely ridiculous take.

Oregon is a high value program. Cal can't win 6 games can't get fans to watch, let alone casuals, and has almost no funding.

Oregon is in a massively better position right now.

---

Exactly. Why would the B1G want us? Academics? Who cares. Rivalries? Against USC? Puhleez. UCLA? From UCLA's perspective - I doubt they even care. Frankly all this talk about a package deal of "if you take ucLa, you have to take us" is absurd. It's like the uglier sister crying to mommy demanding the older hot sister take her to the dance with her. B1G doesn't want us.

---

This is absolutely all true. However, it's in both the regents and the state's best interest to have cal tag along. And they probably have more leverage in this situation than they care to realise. Whether they exert that leverage, however, is doubtful

---

They very likely have zero leverage. USC is the big get, UCLA is a nice to have. The regents very well could be looking at the option of having one UC hit the big payday, or having zero, because the B1G could just take someone else.

---

I don't agree with that at all. I think this whole thing could fall apart without ucla.

Let's say ucla doesn't go. Taking either Oregon/Uw is a huge step down. Ucla is the top athletics/academic school in the world (however much I hate to say that). I'd argue their brand name carries more weight around the world than usc. You want to eventually make inroads into Asia? You need ucla. They are also the premier basketball program in the west (yes, they are…before Arizona and gonzaga). Plus They are in the LA media market.

Plus it's not even clear that Oregon/UW are going to be able to go (because of their state legislatures)

I honestly don't think furd is making the move.

If the big10 wants a west coast footprint, including ucla is an absolute must.

You get ucla and the entire pac12 begins to crumble. And it'll be much easier to pick off the oregons/washingtons/furds.

There is a D2. Its below FCS.

Taking a step back from the cliff..a slightly different take..

philly1121 said:

---

maxer said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

Alkiadt said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

I feel bad for Wilcox - turned the Oregon job down and now he's stuck in piddly-dink pac-10 (or 8). He will def leave after this year.

---

Oregon is no better off than Cal at this point.

---

absolutely ridiculous take.

Oregon is a high value program. Cal can't win 6 games can't get fans to watch, let alone casuals, and has almost no funding.

Oregon is in a massively better position right now.

---

Exactly. Why would the B1G want us? Academics? Who cares. Rivalries? Against USC? Puhleez. UCLA? From UCLA's perspective - I doubt they even care. Frankly all this talk about a package deal of "if you take ucLa, you have to take us" is absurd. It's like the uglier sister crying to mommy demanding the older hot sister take her to the dance with her. B1G doesn't want us.

---

Feels like this is more about you than than college football. Good luck with all that.

---

It's reality. It's money. What are you a farmer from 1950s Iowa? You need a reality check. Cal brings nothing to the B1G. If the rivalries mattered to the LA schools - they wouldn't have jumped.

---

You do pick up the sixth largest media market and appease UC / state leg (not that I'd bank on them to stop UCLA from going solo). Obviously, that requires Stanford to be involved, but that's still a valve add even if not all eyes are on football in the Bay Area.

calumnus said:

---

BearSD said:

---

TandemBear said:

---

"Does the Pac 10 try to add Boise, UNLV, Fresno?"

Does it matter? This is probably the direction the Pac will take, but it's a loser. Monetarily, it's no net gain. It signifies the demise of the Pac Athletic Conference, regardless of what mid-majors we add. Decline into obscurity ultimately. Not good. Not good at all from a revenue standpoint.

---

IMO, if there are no further defections from the Pac, the priority order for new members would be:
1. San Diego State
2. UNLV
3. (close to 2, might flip 2 and 3) Boise State
4. (tie) Fresno State, Colorado State

And yes, this would be just making the best of a bad situation. It's not a cure for anything.

But even if the Big Ten says no to every remaining Pac member, some or all of the mountain time zone schools might look at the Big 12. Possibly, the Big 12 is already trying to poach the Arizona schools with messages like, "Hey, if you can't get into the Big Ten, we'd love to have you join the Big 12."

---

UNLV now has to compete with the Raiders in a small market.

San Diego State might make some sense.

However, I am beginning to think the worst option is adding teams to the PAC to get back to 12 or more. We should obviously first try to convince the B10 to form a Pacific pod with us in it. If that fails this round, we should still leave that as an option or leave it open for USC and uCLA to come back. Adding new teams complicates our future.

It is not ideal, but the fall back option should be a smaller PAC that plays a round robin and then plays UCLA, USC and other B1G teams (plus ND?) as OOC games. We need to reaffirm our tie to the Rose Bowl. Push for playoff expansion that emphasizes conference champs to undermine superconferences.

However, the power move for Cal is to be CALIFORNIA and reassert our claim on the entire state. That means energizing our huge SoCal alumni base by playing one game each year in LA, Orange County and or San Diego as CALIFORNIA. Those could be late season Saturday night games that would be too cold in the Bay Area or Pacific Northwest. There are new stadiums now. Give it a bowl like atmosphere. I am sure Oregon wants to still play in SoCal. Play Nortre Dame or BYU every year in LA. Play Navy in San Diego. Invite our local recruits.

---

Bruce Jenkins suggests going even farther than you suggest.

Gack. I'll go with a Pac-6. North only. And great work, Jon!

— Bruce Jenkins (@Bruce_Jenkins1) July 1, 2022

This sounds like sour grapes. The Bears could stay in the Pac 8, or 10, or join another conference.

The old NCAC D2 conference is gone, there is the Mountain West and Big Sky.