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

---

Oklahoma State had the same agreement with Oklahoma. Didn't stop the Sooners from moving to the SEC.

62bear said:

---

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?

---

The B1G isn't going to 21 teams. If they add Notre Dame, I'd expect Oregon to follow, along with Washington and probably Stanford. That's 20 teams.

BigDaddy said:

---

62bear said:

---

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?

---

The B1G isn't going to 21 teams. If they add Notre Dame, I'd expect Oregon to follow, along with Washington and probably Stanford. That's 20 teams.

---

Won't likely be Furd. Either Utah or Udub.

One problem with Cal: literally the lowest TV numbers of any Pac team

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

---

If there eve was a program not named Alabama or TOSU that had the money to do whatever they want....

wifeisafurd said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

62bear said:

---

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?

---

The B1G isn't going to 21 teams. If they add Notre Dame, I'd expect Oregon to follow, along with Washington and probably Stanford. That's 20 teams.

---

Won't likely be Furd. Either Utah or Udub.

One problem with Cal: literally the lowest TV numbers of any Pac team

---

To get to 20 teams, they need 4 more programs... Notre Dame. Oregon. Washington and then the last team in will be Furd. If they don't want it, there are many other teams clamoring for an invite, and not just from the Pac-12.

wifeisafurd said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

62bear said:

---

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?

---

The B1G isn't going to 21 teams. If they add Notre Dame, I'd expect Oregon to follow, along with Washington and probably Stanford. That's 20 teams.

---

Won't likely be Furd. Either Utah or Udub.

One problem with Cal: literally the lowest TV numbers of any Pac team

---

so if furd goes some sort of "ivy" route or pulls the plug on football, who is the most attractive remaining pac team (assuming they take UW and oregon) to have a reasonable western pod among the remainders of utah, colorado, or cal (or wazzu or oregon state)? my bear-colored glasses say that cal is the pick among those three but the terrible tv numbers are a definite minus. maybe they go the other way thinking they have the california tv market locked up with sc/ucla and go with one of the arizona teams?

goldenchild said:

---

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.

---

Well but don't you think the B1G has already done some value studies on this? What value does Cal add? The 6th largest media market seems a bit suspect to me but only in terms of sports. Bay Area is Niners, Warriors and Giants. We aren't really part of what makes Bay Area the 6th largest media market.

I don't know what the answer is. It just seems like there is no reason for the B1G to want us. They certainly don't need us.

philly1121 said:

---

goldenchild said:

---

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.

---

Well but don't you think the B1G has already done some value studies on this? What value does Cal add? The 6th largest media market seems a bit suspect to me but only in terms of sports. Bay Area is Niners, Warriors and Giants. We aren't really part of what makes Bay Area the 6th largest media market.

I don't know what the answer is. It just seems like there is no reason for the B1G to want us. They certainly don't need us.

---

Cal does relatively well when we are good. The ratings are all out of whack because the Pac-12 network doesn't publish ratings.

There is value in being in the Bay Area, with the best public school in the world. Or, maybe there isn't. And if there isn't then the taxpayers can pay off the stadium bond I guess.

Not up to us either way.

maxer said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

goldenchild said:

---

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.

---

Well but don't you think the B1G has already done some value studies on this? What value does Cal add? The 6th largest media market seems a bit suspect to me but only in terms of sports. Bay Area is Niners, Warriors and Giants. We aren't really part of what makes Bay Area the 6th largest media market.

I don't know what the answer is. It just seems like there is no reason for the B1G to want us. They certainly don't need us.

---

Cal does relatively well when we are good. The ratings are all out of whack because the Pac-12 network doesn't publish ratings.

There is value in being in the Bay Area, with the best public school in the world. Or, maybe there isn't. And if there isn't then the taxpayers can pay off the stadium bond I guess.

Not up to us either way.

---

Not sure of the numbers because the Pac-12 Network confuses everything, as you say. But when Cal regularly had games televised on the national networks they tended to do well, especially when paired with the other California schools or Oregon/Washington. Historically there has been an audience when we're good.

So maybe that's recognized in any potential reshuffling. We're at a low ebb right now but there are reasons to think there's more upside here.

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

---

I'm surprised that you would find a way to make this political.


PROHIBITION ON STATE-FUNDED AND STATE-SPONSORED TRAVEL TO STATES WITH DISCRIMINATORY LAWS (ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 1887) | State of California - Department of Justice - Office of the Attorney General

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

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

---

It's only in the regents interest the way it's in the regents interest that they take Davis, too.

The regents would be absolutely working against UCs best interest to risk killing a deal that puts a UC team in a premier conference so it's older brother can tag along, even though the older brother has consistently told mom and dad they don't want to play big time football anymore, and like the JV team.

Imagine if Cal didn't join the pac8 because some kind of "well, you didn't take Olympic club" nonsense.

wifeisafurd said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

62bear said:

---

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?

---

The B1G isn't going to 21 teams. If they add Notre Dame, I'd expect Oregon to follow, along with Washington and probably Stanford. That's 20 teams.

---

Won't likely be Furd. Either Utah or Udub.

One problem with Cal: literally the lowest TV numbers of any Pac team

---

This reminds me of something a guy who's name sounds like Milner once told a buddy of mine (paraphrasing, and it was early in the commenting on articles phase of the internet):

Cal fans are delusional about how much support Cal has. They think because they understand the internet and harass people about how big a footprint Cal has that Cal has a big footprint. They complain when Cal doesn't get press, but no one cares. No one reads it. It doesn't sell papers or get clicks.

The conversation started with how obnoxiously delusional Iowa fans were.

That's a reality. We don't have the Bay Area market. We are in the Bay Area market and draw being three teams in our own region. That's the truth.

Cal is OSU level. The list of teams that are better brands to have on board is long. And Cal's draw is purely "good teams have played them for 100 years."

It's the cost of accepting less than mediocrity in hopes that an offensive or defensive coordinators could be picked up, or that "he built this program." It's the cost of allowing Academia to dictate how athletics was run at the campus level (because it certainly isn't a system problem).

For a LONG time it's been embarrassing to be away from home and force people to watch Cal football as though we were some program worthy of 4 hours of attention.

This is who we wanted to be, and this is who we are. A bad program with fans who think we deserve more because 85 years ago we won a rose bowl.

62bear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

62bear said:

---

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?

---

The B1G isn't going to 21 teams. If they add Notre Dame, I'd expect Oregon to follow, along with Washington and probably Stanford. That's 20 teams.

---

Won't likely be Furd. Either Utah or Udub.

One problem with Cal: literally the lowest TV numbers of any Pac team

---

so if furd goes some sort of "ivy" route or pulls the plug on football, who is the most attractive remaining pac team (assuming they take UW and oregon) to have a reasonable western pod among the remainders of utah, colorado, or cal (or wazzu or oregon state)? my bear-colored glasses say that cal is the pick among those three but the terrible tv numbers are a definite minus. maybe they go the other way thinking they have the california tv market locked up with sc/ucla and go with one of the arizona teams?

---

It doesn't have to be a pac team. The BIG12 is also applying. So are the better mid majors. Make a list of teams not in the SEC and their viewership.

B1G took USC. It's not about academics.

sycasey said:

---

maxer said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

goldenchild said:

---

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.

---

Well but don't you think the B1G has already done some value studies on this? What value does Cal add? The 6th largest media market seems a bit suspect to me but only in terms of sports. Bay Area is Niners, Warriors and Giants. We aren't really part of what makes Bay Area the 6th largest media market.

I don't know what the answer is. It just seems like there is no reason for the B1G to want us. They certainly don't need us.

---

Cal does relatively well when we are good. The ratings are all out of whack because the Pac-12 network doesn't publish ratings.

There is value in being in the Bay Area, with the best public school in the world. Or, maybe there isn't. And if there isn't then the taxpayers can pay off the stadium bond I guess.

Not up to us either way.

---

Not sure of the numbers because the Pac-12 Network confuses everything, as you say. But when Cal regularly had games televised on the national networks they tended to do well, especially when paired with the other California schools or Oregon/Washington. Historically there has been an audience when we're good.

So maybe that's recognized in any potential reshuffling. We're at a low ebb right now but there are reasons to think there's more upside here.

---

Cal drawing well playing USC, UCLA, Washington and Oregon is a function of the opponents draw. How does Cal look playing Washington compared to Washington playing Oregon?

All I am saying is that anyone who thinks Cal is a good business partner are just ignoring the reality of the position we put ourselves in over the last several decades. We flashed hot for 4 seasons. The last one was 15 years ago. The lower end of the demo that is most important in 2024 wasn't born when Cal last made Sports center for anything significant.

LunchTime said:

---

62bear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

62bear said:

---

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?

---

The B1G isn't going to 21 teams. If they add Notre Dame, I'd expect Oregon to follow, along with Washington and probably Stanford. That's 20 teams.

---

Won't likely be Furd. Either Utah or Udub.

One problem with Cal: literally the lowest TV numbers of any Pac team

---

so if furd goes some sort of "ivy" route or pulls the plug on football, who is the most attractive remaining pac team (assuming they take UW and oregon) to have a reasonable western pod among the remainders of utah, colorado, or cal (or wazzu or oregon state)? my bear-colored glasses say that cal is the pick among those three but the terrible tv numbers are a definite minus. maybe they go the other way thinking they have the california tv market locked up with sc/ucla and go with one of the arizona teams?

---

It doesn't have to be a pac team. The BIG12 is also applying. So are the better mid majors. Make a list of teams not in the SEC and their viewership.

B1G took USC. It's not about academics.

---

Not to mention, along with ND, other ACC teams (Clemson, Florida State, Miami) have to be interested in joinng the SEC or BiG.

But Cal has plenty of Recreation Mngmt, Sociology, and Criminal Justice majors. Facilities were what, 20 years behind? Different culture than LA.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/usc-and-ucla-join-big-ten-live-news-updates-as-pac-12-powers-kick-start-more-conference-realignment/live/

Our Dennis Dodd reports that Oregon and Washington have been told by the Big Ten that it is standing pat for now. The Big Ten is waiting on a decision by Notre Dame ... from there you've got to wonder if having 17 or 19 teams would make sense. An even 18 or 20 is probably simpler. Uncomfortable moment of limbo for the Ducks and Huskies. Notre Dame, meanwhile, continues to wield great leverage as an Independent.

Pac-12 just released the following statement suggesting expansion is on the table as the league regroups from the loss of UCLA and USC: "The Pac-12 Board of Directors met this morning and authorized the Conference to explore all expansion options. The 10 university presidents and chancellors remain committed to a shared mission of academic and athletic excellence on behalf of our student-athletes."

Saw an interesting post by a Trojan on a Duck Board just now. The Ducks were discussing why Oregon would likely be the next one chosen by the Big 10 if Notre Dame accepted. The Trojan wrote, "Sorry......but if Notre Dame agrees it will probably not be Oregon. Cal, Stanford or Washington all fit better if my guess is correct.

They all have more powerful academics. larger schools, very large markets and don't present a situation in the NIL era in which a rich person who is extremely supportive can outbid the rest of the league for talent.

Even USC or UCLA, now members of the Big 10 might veto Oregon membership. They want the southern Cal recruiting for themselves. Weakening Oregon only helps them. Having Oregon in an expanded Big 12 does that. Playing Stanford and Cal is an easier and closer road game for the LA teams. Neither recruits well in CA.

As a USC fan I don't see what USC did positively in the long term. The travel is going to kill them.......but.........they sure screwed the rest of the conference......particularly, Washington, Oregon, Cal and Stanford. The other pac 12 members really never belonged in a power 5 or can make a good fit with the Big 12 easily."

Rose Bowl toast?

WoodlandBear said:

---

Saw an interesting post by a Trojan on a Duck Board just now. The Ducks were discussing why Oregon would likely be the next one chosen by the Big 10 if Notre Dame accepted. The Trojan wrote, "Sorry......but if Notre Dame agrees it will probably not be Oregon. Cal, Stanford or Washington all fit better if my guess is correct.

They all have more powerful academics. larger schools, very large markets and don't present a situation in the NIL era in which a rich person who is extremely supportive can outbid the rest of the league for talent.

Even USC or UCLA, now members of the Big 10 might veto Oregon membership. They want the southern Cal recruiting for themselves. Weakening Oregon only helps them. Having Oregon in an expanded Big 12 does that. Playing Stanford and Cal is an easier and closer road game for the LA teams. Neither recruits well in CA.

As a USC fan I don't see what USC did positively in the long term. The travel is going to kill them.......but.........they sure screwed the rest of the conference......particularly, Washington, Oregon, Cal and Stanford. The other pac 12 members really never belonged in a power 5 or can make a good fit with the Big 12 easily."

---

Well, Cal certainly isn't outbidding anyone for talent.

BearSD said:

---

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

---

Yeah, if it comes to it, let the AZs and Mountain guys go to the B12. Pac 6. Just sign long term agreements to play UCLA and USC every year as one of our 7 OOC games. The key is having home, away and "neutral" scheduling, with the neutral games in SoCal on Saturday nights. As I said, play Navy in San Diego every year. Run busses for the students that leave Friday night and/or Saturday morning arrive in SoCal by that afternoon. Have a huge pre-game tailgate, then depart after the game and are back in Berkeley by Sunday morning.

Thanksgiving weekend students from SoCal can attend games in SoCal after the holiday.

The Pacific conference does not need to surrender the LA market.

deleted

DiabloWags said:

---

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

---

I'm surprised that you would find a way to make this political.


PROHIBITION ON STATE-FUNDED AND STATE-SPONSORED TRAVEL TO STATES WITH DISCRIMINATORY LAWS (ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 1887) | State of California - Department of Justice - Office of the Attorney General

---

So...how does fUCLA get to travel to play tOSU, Iowa, Indiana and Purdue, for example?

I don't think Cal wants to play at Fresno ever again.

WoodlandBear said:

---

Saw an interesting post by a Trojan on a Duck Board just now. The Ducks were discussing why Oregon would likely be the next one chosen by the Big 10 if Notre Dame accepted. The Trojan wrote, "Sorry......but if Notre Dame agrees it will probably not be Oregon. Cal, Stanford or Washington all fit better if my guess is correct.

They all have more powerful academics. larger schools, very large markets and don't present a situation in the NIL era in which a rich person who is extremely supportive can outbid the rest of the league for talent.

Even USC or UCLA, now members of the Big 10 might veto Oregon membership. They want the southern Cal recruiting for themselves. Weakening Oregon only helps them. Having Oregon in an expanded Big 12 does that. Playing Stanford and Cal is an easier and closer road game for the LA teams. Neither recruits well in CA.

As a USC fan I don't see what USC did positively in the long term. The travel is going to kill them.......but.........they sure screwed the rest of the conference......particularly, Washington, Oregon, Cal and Stanford. The other pac 12 members really never belonged in a power 5 or can make a good fit with the Big 12 easily."

---

Disagree with the Trojan post. Regardless of whether ND is in or out, don't think Stanford would join. And secondly, of the remaining Pac schools, the priority order for the BiG would be U-Dub, Oregon and then Cal. But in reality, other ACC schools would be more attractive if they can't get into the SEC.

Big Dog said:

---

WoodlandBear said:

---

Saw an interesting post by a Trojan on a Duck Board just now. The Ducks were discussing why Oregon would likely be the next one chosen by the Big 10 if Notre Dame accepted. The Trojan wrote, "Sorry......but if Notre Dame agrees it will probably not be Oregon. Cal, Stanford or Washington all fit better if my guess is correct.

They all have more powerful academics. larger schools, very large markets and don't present a situation in the NIL era in which a rich person who is extremely supportive can outbid the rest of the league for talent.

Even USC or UCLA, now members of the Big 10 might veto Oregon membership. They want the southern Cal recruiting for themselves. Weakening Oregon only helps them. Having Oregon in an expanded Big 12 does that. Playing Stanford and Cal is an easier and closer road game for the LA teams. Neither recruits well in CA.

As a USC fan I don't see what USC did positively in the long term. The travel is going to kill them.......but.........they sure screwed the rest of the conference......particularly, Washington, Oregon, Cal and Stanford. The other pac 12 members really never belonged in a power 5 or can make a good fit with the Big 12 easily."

---

Disagree with the Trojan post. Regardless of whether ND is in or out, don't think Stanford would join. And secondly, of the remaining Pac schools, the priority order for the BiG would be U-Dub, Oregon and then Cal. But in reality, other ACC schools would be more attractive if they can't get into the SEC.

---

Why wouldn't Stamford want to join?

Stanford is the one school here that probably could do fine going independent.

juarezbear said:

---

Big Dog said:

---

WoodlandBear said:

---

Saw an interesting post by a Trojan on a Duck Board just now. The Ducks were discussing why Oregon would likely be the next one chosen by the Big 10 if Notre Dame accepted. The Trojan wrote, "Sorry......but if Notre Dame agrees it will probably not be Oregon. Cal, Stanford or Washington all fit better if my guess is correct.

They all have more powerful academics. larger schools, very large markets and don't present a situation in the NIL era in which a rich person who is extremely supportive can outbid the rest of the league for talent.

Even USC or UCLA, now members of the Big 10 might veto Oregon membership. They want the southern Cal recruiting for themselves. Weakening Oregon only helps them. Having Oregon in an expanded Big 12 does that. Playing Stanford and Cal is an easier and closer road game for the LA teams. Neither recruits well in CA.

As a USC fan I don't see what USC did positively in the long term. The travel is going to kill them.......but.........they sure screwed the rest of the conference......particularly, Washington, Oregon, Cal and Stanford. The other pac 12 members really never belonged in a power 5 or can make a good fit with the Big 12 easily."

---

Disagree with the Trojan post. Regardless of whether ND is in or out, don't think Stanford would join. And secondly, of the remaining Pac schools, the priority order for the BiG would be U-Dub, Oregon and then Cal. But in reality, other ACC schools would be more attractive if they can't get into the SEC.

---

Why wouldn't Stamford want to join?

---

I know this will be disgusting, but imagine you are a furdie. What do you gain by joining the big10?

Money? Don't care
Football? Don't care

What is actually important to them? Being better than everyone else. Acting like you're above the fray. They don't need big10's money. In their minds, they will still be better than everyone else.

You know what else they care about? Actually caring about being a true student/athlete (or at least painting that facade to the outside world). I just don't see how they can accept or justify sending their student athletes (in the Olympic sports ie the sports they actually care about) all the way across the country for every away game/match.

This is the simple fact. You cannot claim to care about academics AND athletics if your student athletes are consistently in an airplane and not in class.

I just can't see Stanford doing anything that's going to tarnish their reputation…especially if it's for something as demeaning as money. That's just not the Stanford way.

BigDaddy said:

---

62bear said:

---

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?

---

The B1G isn't going to 21 teams. If they add Notre Dame, I'd expect Oregon to follow, along with Washington and probably Stanford. That's 20 teams.

---

If that's the case, why wait for ND? They could add Oregon and Washington now, then ND and Stanford later. Doesn't make sense. If they wanted Oregon and Washington, it would have happened with $c and UCLA already.

bledblue said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

62bear said:

---

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?

---

The B1G isn't going to 21 teams. If they add Notre Dame, I'd expect Oregon to follow, along with Washington and probably Stanford. That's 20 teams.

---

If that's the case, why wait for ND? They could add Oregon and Washington now, then ND and Stanford later. Doesn't make sense. If they wanted Oregon and Washington, it would have happened with $c and UCLA already.

---

they are waiting for ND to decide, no question. And they'd like to add in pairs, so its either UDub or Oregon. But they are also awaiting to see if other football schools in the ACC want to leave teh basketball conference, speficially Clemson, Miami or Florida State. My guess is that they'd rather have Miami (to add the Florida footprint) over Portland. Uncle Phil's money would be a nice-to-have, but Florida or Washington TV footprint >>> Oregon.

LunchTime 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

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

---

It's only in the regents interest the way it's in the regents interest that they take Davis, too.

The regents would be absolutely working against UCs best interest to risk killing a deal that puts a UC team in a premier conference so it's older brother can tag along, even though the older brother has consistently told mom and dad they don't want to play big time football anymore, and like the JV team.

Imagine if Cal didn't join the pac8 because some kind of "well, you didn't take Olympic club" nonsense.

---

Davis doesn't have $700m of stadium bonds that taxpayers will have to pay for if they default, nor do they have an athletic department with 30 sports, many of them womens sports, that would have to be cut without bigtime football revenue.

AuBear81 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

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

---

I'm surprised that you would find a way to make this political.


PROHIBITION ON STATE-FUNDED AND STATE-SPONSORED TRAVEL TO STATES WITH DISCRIMINATORY LAWS (ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 1887) | State of California - Department of Justice - Office of the Attorney General

---

So...how does fUCLA get to travel to play tOSU, Iowa, Indiana and Purdue, for example?

---

The same way we'll be able to play in Utah (which is also on the list). There's an exception that I can't remember the details of for college sports (and some other things).

I read here that the reason Rutgers was added was because the TV contract the Big10 has forces cable providers in regions with Big10 schools to pay fees. They wanted that sweet New Jersey money. I doubt Rutgers is a ratings draw or draws at the stadium either. In the same way, it would make sense to add Cal and/or Stanford in order to get all those SF Bay Area subscriber dollars. It doesn't really matter too much if anyone actually watches the games. Is Rutgers really more desirable than Cal or Stanford?

dimitrig said:

---

I read here that the reason Rutgers was added was because the TV contract the Big10 has forces cable providers in regions with Big10 schools to pay fees. They wanted that sweet New Jersey money. I doubt Rutgers is a ratings draw or draws at the stadium either. In the same way, it would make sense to add Cal and/or Stanford in order to get all those SF Bay Area subscriber dollars. It doesn't really matter too much if anyone actually watches the games. Is Rutgers really more desirable than Cal or Stanford?

---

There is some truth to this, but also back then it was about forcing carriage of the big 10 network on local cable systems. It's less about that now since the media landscape has changed.

Big Dog said:

---

bledblue said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

62bear said:

---

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?

---

The B1G isn't going to 21 teams. If they add Notre Dame, I'd expect Oregon to follow, along with Washington and probably Stanford. That's 20 teams.

---

If that's the case, why wait for ND? They could add Oregon and Washington now, then ND and Stanford later. Doesn't make sense. If they wanted Oregon and Washington, it would have happened with $c and UCLA already.

---

they are waiting for ND to decide, no question. And they'd like to add in pairs, so its either UDub or Oregon. But they are also awaiting to see if other football schools in the ACC want to leave teh basketball conference, speficially Clemson, Miami or Florida State. My guess is that they'd rather have Miami (to add the Florida footprint) over Portland. Uncle Phil's money would be a nice-to-have, but Florida or Washington TV footprint >>> Oregon.

---

Clemson, Florida State and Miami are not AAU schools, which they already said would be a condition of acceptance. Maybe N. Carolina ? Still doesn't affect adding two pac-10 teams if they wanted them.