sycasey said:

---

Big C said:

---

sycasey said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

This would be a major (seemingly positive) development for the #Pac12 https://t.co/PlEhBk41no

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

If the #Pac12 did, in fact, extend its exclusive negotiating window with ESPN and Fox, the former would have the option to lock up the entire rights package in coming weeks before the inventory goes to market.

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

The #Pac12 can offer ESPN 26 late windows (Fri + Sat x 13 weeks), most of them competition-free. I suspect both nights will play a central role in negotiations & possible deal. Price point might depend on the pick selections.

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

---

ESPN being out of the B1G media deal is GREAT news for Cal. Now ESPN will badly want the PAC-12 to slot after the SEC games and can be a great partner for marketing our brand in SoCal in competition with the LA schools. Maybe more SEC matchups? Our chances of finally getting an ESPN Gameday just went up.

It also creates more of an incentive for Fox and the B1G to want to break up the PAC-12 by offering more PAC-12 schools.

Either way, this is good news for Cal

---

It would mean more night games, wouldn't it? Unless we are in the top 10, College GameDay will NEVER come to Cal.

P12 versus the SEC would not be a good thing right now. The P12 would get rolled.

---

You may right about Game Day, but I totally disagree on the SEC. Having a ton of games will increase the PAC's visibility and allow our top teams to play if time schools. We can't moan about not getting into the B1G then turn tail at the chance to play against the SEC.

---

Aren't we 3-1 against SEC in the recent past (2 vs Tennessee and 2 vs Ole Miss)? 5-1 if you throw Texas in there.

Don't know about the rest of the PAC but it's clear we own that conference!!!!

---

Yeah. People keep saying we'd be destroyed in the two super conferences (B1G and SEC), but recent results don't support that.

The SEC is not only Alabama, Georgia, and LSU. They have mediocre programs too.

---

This is the part I don't get: Shouldn't the long-term plan be for these "super-conferences" to jettison their weak sisters? Since we're looking at a wholesale shakeup anyway, why don't the stronger teams completely abandon the conferences they are in right now and form something brand new, instead of having to share with the likes of Indiana, Illinois, etc.?

Something to do with contracts, I would imagine. But only a matter of time, right?

---

We'll see what happens, but IMO the "power" programs want the benefit of having 5 to 7 free wins every year. If they only had to play each other then a bunch of them would go 3-9 or 2-10 and that would not make the donors happy.

---

Yes. The only way to have perennial winners is to have perennial losers. It's even better when a loser is good from time to time to keep their fans' faith alive or at least to lose by close margins so that games are somewhat exciting.

gardenstatebear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Big C said:

---

sycasey said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

This would be a major (seemingly positive) development for the #Pac12 https://t.co/PlEhBk41no

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

If the #Pac12 did, in fact, extend its exclusive negotiating window with ESPN and Fox, the former would have the option to lock up the entire rights package in coming weeks before the inventory goes to market.

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

The #Pac12 can offer ESPN 26 late windows (Fri + Sat x 13 weeks), most of them competition-free. I suspect both nights will play a central role in negotiations & possible deal. Price point might depend on the pick selections.

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

---

ESPN being out of the B1G media deal is GREAT news for Cal. Now ESPN will badly want the PAC-12 to slot after the SEC games and can be a great partner for marketing our brand in SoCal in competition with the LA schools. Maybe more SEC matchups? Our chances of finally getting an ESPN Gameday just went up.

It also creates more of an incentive for Fox and the B1G to want to break up the PAC-12 by offering more PAC-12 schools.

Either way, this is good news for Cal

---

It would mean more night games, wouldn't it? Unless we are in the top 10, College GameDay will NEVER come to Cal.

P12 versus the SEC would not be a good thing right now. The P12 would get rolled.

---

You may right about Game Day, but I totally disagree on the SEC. Having a ton of games will increase the PAC's visibility and allow our top teams to play if time schools. We can't moan about not getting into the B1G then turn tail at the chance to play against the SEC.

---

Aren't we 3-1 against SEC in the recent past (2 vs Tennessee and 2 vs Ole Miss)? 5-1 if you throw Texas in there.

Don't know about the rest of the PAC but it's clear we own that conference!!!!

---

Yeah. People keep saying we'd be destroyed in the two super conferences (B1G and SEC), but recent results don't support that.

The SEC is not only Alabama, Georgia, and LSU. They have mediocre programs too.

---

This is the part I don't get: Shouldn't the long-term plan be for these "super-conferences" to jettison their weak sisters? Since we're looking at a wholesale shakeup anyway, why don't the stronger teams completely abandon the conferences they are in right now and form something brand new, instead of having to share with the likes of Indiana, Illinois, etc.?

Something to do with contracts, I would imagine. But only a matter of time, right?

---

We'll see what happens, but IMO the "power" programs want the benefit of having 5 to 7 free wins every year. If they only had to play each other then a bunch of them would go 3-9 or 2-10 and that would not make the donors happy.

---

Yes. The only way to have perennial winners is to have perennial losers. It's even better when a loser is good from time to time to keep their fans' faith alive or at least to lose by close margins so that games are somewhat exciting.

---

Yup. That's the equilibrium that college sports has had for decades: the top programs win most of the time, but the middling programs will also have times when they rise up and beat the big boys. That keeps everyone interested.

Look at the Pac-10/12: pretty much every program has had a time within the last 30 years when they were considered a major contender. USC and Oregon have been there more often, but they've all been there.

Consolidating the most powerful programs into a single conference threatens that equilibrium.

Big C said:

---

sycasey said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

This would be a major (seemingly positive) development for the #Pac12 https://t.co/PlEhBk41no

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

If the #Pac12 did, in fact, extend its exclusive negotiating window with ESPN and Fox, the former would have the option to lock up the entire rights package in coming weeks before the inventory goes to market.

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

The #Pac12 can offer ESPN 26 late windows (Fri + Sat x 13 weeks), most of them competition-free. I suspect both nights will play a central role in negotiations & possible deal. Price point might depend on the pick selections.

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

---

ESPN being out of the B1G media deal is GREAT news for Cal. Now ESPN will badly want the PAC-12 to slot after the SEC games and can be a great partner for marketing our brand in SoCal in competition with the LA schools. Maybe more SEC matchups? Our chances of finally getting an ESPN Gameday just went up.

It also creates more of an incentive for Fox and the B1G to want to break up the PAC-12 by offering more PAC-12 schools.

Either way, this is good news for Cal

---

It would mean more night games, wouldn't it? Unless we are in the top 10, College GameDay will NEVER come to Cal.

P12 versus the SEC would not be a good thing right now. The P12 would get rolled.

---

You may right about Game Day, but I totally disagree on the SEC. Having a ton of games will increase the PAC's visibility and allow our top teams to play if time schools. We can't moan about not getting into the B1G then turn tail at the chance to play against the SEC.

---

Aren't we 3-1 against SEC in the recent past (2 vs Tennessee and 2 vs Ole Miss)? 5-1 if you throw Texas in there.

Don't know about the rest of the PAC but it's clear we own that conference!!!!

---

Yeah. People keep saying we'd be destroyed in the two super conferences (B1G and SEC), but recent results don't support that.

The SEC is not only Alabama, Georgia, and LSU. They have mediocre programs too.

---

This is the part I don't get: Shouldn't the long-term plan be for these "super-conferences" to jettison their weak sisters? Since we're looking at a wholesale shakeup anyway, why don't the stronger teams completely abandon the conferences they are in right now and form something brand new, instead of having to share with the likes of Indiana, Illinois, etc.?

Something to do with contracts, I would imagine. But only a matter of time, right?

---

The way they would jettison their weak sisters is the same way the WAC did it. 8 teams left the WAC to form a new conference. You don't kick the weak out; the strong leave. But the weak sisters aren't the doormats who lose a lot. They're the teams who don't bring anything to the table. Indiana and Illinois bring large alumni bases in populous states who still believe their primary purpose is to educate rather than to entertain their state with football; that's worth a lot to the Big Ten right now in their chess match against the SEC.

sycasey said:

---

Big C said:

---

sycasey said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

This would be a major (seemingly positive) development for the #Pac12 https://t.co/PlEhBk41no

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

If the #Pac12 did, in fact, extend its exclusive negotiating window with ESPN and Fox, the former would have the option to lock up the entire rights package in coming weeks before the inventory goes to market.

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

The #Pac12 can offer ESPN 26 late windows (Fri + Sat x 13 weeks), most of them competition-free. I suspect both nights will play a central role in negotiations & possible deal. Price point might depend on the pick selections.

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

---

ESPN being out of the B1G media deal is GREAT news for Cal. Now ESPN will badly want the PAC-12 to slot after the SEC games and can be a great partner for marketing our brand in SoCal in competition with the LA schools. Maybe more SEC matchups? Our chances of finally getting an ESPN Gameday just went up.

It also creates more of an incentive for Fox and the B1G to want to break up the PAC-12 by offering more PAC-12 schools.

Either way, this is good news for Cal

---

It would mean more night games, wouldn't it? Unless we are in the top 10, College GameDay will NEVER come to Cal.

P12 versus the SEC would not be a good thing right now. The P12 would get rolled.

---

You may right about Game Day, but I totally disagree on the SEC. Having a ton of games will increase the PAC's visibility and allow our top teams to play if time schools. We can't moan about not getting into the B1G then turn tail at the chance to play against the SEC.

---

Aren't we 3-1 against SEC in the recent past (2 vs Tennessee and 2 vs Ole Miss)? 5-1 if you throw Texas in there.

Don't know about the rest of the PAC but it's clear we own that conference!!!!

---

Yeah. People keep saying we'd be destroyed in the two super conferences (B1G and SEC), but recent results don't support that.

The SEC is not only Alabama, Georgia, and LSU. They have mediocre programs too.

---

This is the part I don't get: Shouldn't the long-term plan be for these "super-conferences" to jettison their weak sisters? Since we're looking at a wholesale shakeup anyway, why don't the stronger teams completely abandon the conferences they are in right now and form something brand new, instead of having to share with the likes of Indiana, Illinois, etc.?

Something to do with contracts, I would imagine. But only a matter of time, right?

---

We'll see what happens, but IMO the "power" programs want the benefit of having 5 to 7 free wins every year. If they only had to play each other then a bunch of them would go 3-9 or 2-10 and that would not make the donors happy.

---

I think the B1G, SEC, and the TV Networks (primarily Fox and ESPN) are driving college athletics to a pro-sports model with 40-50 teams competing for 16 playoff spots where you don't need 5-7 free wins every year to make the post season. A model where you don't play any games outside your conference so your conference can keep all that money in house and where the TV networks can air more games with playoff implications. Those free wins make for terrible TV. Those road trips to other conference represent money lost. And those meaningless games pitting a 7-3 team against a 6-4 team represent a lot of lost TV value (and fan interest from both teams) in a world without a playoff,

John Canzano: Oregon President going to the Big Ten - ouch

"The Pac-12 Conference desperately needs stability. These are tumultuous times and Oregon's position as a tentpole of the conference demands a strong, stable voice in the room. Schill's departure to Northwestern will spark some doubt and uncertainty."

sycasey said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

gardenstatebear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Big C said:

---

sycasey said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

This would be a major (seemingly positive) development for the #Pac12 https://t.co/PlEhBk41no

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

If the #Pac12 did, in fact, extend its exclusive negotiating window with ESPN and Fox, the former would have the option to lock up the entire rights package in coming weeks before the inventory goes to market.

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

The #Pac12 can offer ESPN 26 late windows (Fri + Sat x 13 weeks), most of them competition-free. I suspect both nights will play a central role in negotiations & possible deal. Price point might depend on the pick selections.

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

---

ESPN being out of the B1G media deal is GREAT news for Cal. Now ESPN will badly want the PAC-12 to slot after the SEC games and can be a great partner for marketing our brand in SoCal in competition with the LA schools. Maybe more SEC matchups? Our chances of finally getting an ESPN Gameday just went up.

It also creates more of an incentive for Fox and the B1G to want to break up the PAC-12 by offering more PAC-12 schools.

Either way, this is good news for Cal

---

It would mean more night games, wouldn't it? Unless we are in the top 10, College GameDay will NEVER come to Cal.

P12 versus the SEC would not be a good thing right now. The P12 would get rolled.

---

You may right about Game Day, but I totally disagree on the SEC. Having a ton of games will increase the PAC's visibility and allow our top teams to play if time schools. We can't moan about not getting into the B1G then turn tail at the chance to play against the SEC.

---

Aren't we 3-1 against SEC in the recent past (2 vs Tennessee and 2 vs Ole Miss)? 5-1 if you throw Texas in there.

Don't know about the rest of the PAC but it's clear we own that conference!!!!

---

Yeah. People keep saying we'd be destroyed in the two super conferences (B1G and SEC), but recent results don't support that.

The SEC is not only Alabama, Georgia, and LSU. They have mediocre programs too.

---

This is the part I don't get: Shouldn't the long-term plan be for these "super-conferences" to jettison their weak sisters? Since we're looking at a wholesale shakeup anyway, why don't the stronger teams completely abandon the conferences they are in right now and form something brand new, instead of having to share with the likes of Indiana, Illinois, etc.?

Something to do with contracts, I would imagine. But only a matter of time, right?

---

We'll see what happens, but IMO the "power" programs want the benefit of having 5 to 7 free wins every year. If they only had to play each other then a bunch of them would go 3-9 or 2-10 and that would not make the donors happy.

---

Yes. The only way to have perennial winners is to have perennial losers. It's even better when a loser is good from time to time to keep their fans' faith alive or at least to lose by close margins so that games are somewhat exciting.

---

If people just wanted to watch the best vs the best we would watch the NFL. The point of college football is the upsets and the regional involvement. If you have 30 schools and number 30 beats number 1 who cares.

Now...if Appalachian State...a team from a lower division...beats a top 5 ranked Michigan? It happened once...it could happen again...

College football has to be really careful here or its going to shoot the goose that laid the golden egg pursuing short term money to become minor leagues for the NFL. No one cares about minor leagues in any sport anywhere...

---

Bingo. It's the weirdness, tradition, and regionalism that sets college sports apart from the pros. Lose that and you're putting the whole thing at risk. People will eventually figure out that it's just a worse version of the NFL.

---

Plus, by having only 4 years of eligibility you have constant turnover and a level of uncertainty. Recruiting is the off-season sport. A school like Cal can get lucky and find an Aaron Rodgers at Butte College…

MrGPAC said:

---

gardenstatebear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Big C said:

---

sycasey said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

This would be a major (seemingly positive) development for the #Pac12 https://t.co/PlEhBk41no

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

If the #Pac12 did, in fact, extend its exclusive negotiating window with ESPN and Fox, the former would have the option to lock up the entire rights package in coming weeks before the inventory goes to market.

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

The #Pac12 can offer ESPN 26 late windows (Fri + Sat x 13 weeks), most of them competition-free. I suspect both nights will play a central role in negotiations & possible deal. Price point might depend on the pick selections.

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

---

ESPN being out of the B1G media deal is GREAT news for Cal. Now ESPN will badly want the PAC-12 to slot after the SEC games and can be a great partner for marketing our brand in SoCal in competition with the LA schools. Maybe more SEC matchups? Our chances of finally getting an ESPN Gameday just went up.

It also creates more of an incentive for Fox and the B1G to want to break up the PAC-12 by offering more PAC-12 schools.

Either way, this is good news for Cal

---

It would mean more night games, wouldn't it? Unless we are in the top 10, College GameDay will NEVER come to Cal.

P12 versus the SEC would not be a good thing right now. The P12 would get rolled.

---

You may right about Game Day, but I totally disagree on the SEC. Having a ton of games will increase the PAC's visibility and allow our top teams to play if time schools. We can't moan about not getting into the B1G then turn tail at the chance to play against the SEC.

---

Aren't we 3-1 against SEC in the recent past (2 vs Tennessee and 2 vs Ole Miss)? 5-1 if you throw Texas in there.

Don't know about the rest of the PAC but it's clear we own that conference!!!!

---

Yeah. People keep saying we'd be destroyed in the two super conferences (B1G and SEC), but recent results don't support that.

The SEC is not only Alabama, Georgia, and LSU. They have mediocre programs too.

---

This is the part I don't get: Shouldn't the long-term plan be for these "super-conferences" to jettison their weak sisters? Since we're looking at a wholesale shakeup anyway, why don't the stronger teams completely abandon the conferences they are in right now and form something brand new, instead of having to share with the likes of Indiana, Illinois, etc.?

Something to do with contracts, I would imagine. But only a matter of time, right?

---

We'll see what happens, but IMO the "power" programs want the benefit of having 5 to 7 free wins every year. If they only had to play each other then a bunch of them would go 3-9 or 2-10 and that would not make the donors happy.

---

Yes. The only way to have perennial winners is to have perennial losers. It's even better when a loser is good from time to time to keep their fans' faith alive or at least to lose by close margins so that games are somewhat exciting.

---

If people just wanted to watch the best vs the best we would watch the NFL. The point of college football is the upsets and the regional involvement. If you have 30 schools and number 30 beats number 1 who cares.

Now...if Appalachian State...a team from a lower division...beats a top 5 ranked Michigan? It happened once...it could happen again...

College football has to be really careful here or its going to shoot the goose that laid the golden egg pursuing short term money to become minor leagues for the NFL. No one cares about minor leagues in any sport anywhere...

---

The truth is the teams that lose are the Cals, but the sport is just fine.

While I despise the BCS and D1A playoffs, and think its the cause of the loss of tradition, the VAST majority of college football fans were clamoring for a "true champion." They wanted to see the best teams playing, and didnt like that multiple groups of fans could spend decades basking in the glory of a split championship. They put their dollars on watching the best teams, not their teams.


It is never going back to a time when Cal could win a "National Championship" along with 4 other teams (Something we celebrate 100 years later, FWIW). Those days are gone so we can know if Georgia, after losing to Alabama, is better than Alabama in a rematch... and people LOVE it.

The things Cal fans valued, like losing a Rose Bowl, or a split Championship don't matter to Cal fans as much as making sure Georgia gets a second shot at 'Bama. And it hurts Cal but not the sport.

The reality is that "pro-lite" works. March Madness is a cultural touchstone that brings everyone to the table from presidents to the coworker who doesnt know what a basketball is. Its bigger than the NBA playoffs, and they only give room to the top quintile of teams to participate and celebrate when the worst-of-those-best beats the best-of-those-best.

The top quintile of D1A football is less than 30 teams. It works in basketball, and even diehard college football fans will never go back to the possibility of a not watching the best teams compete so they can maybe go to the Rose Bowl someday... so why not have 13 weeks worth of the best of the best instead of 2 or 3?

If there was a goose, it was killed for its egg when the demands for a Championship Game won out. Since then the fans have have maybe abandoned their own teams, but they keep spending money to watch the "NFL-lite" teams.

maxer said:

---

I'd argue that your'e right, and it works now, but over time it will slowly reduce the appeal of the sport.

A pro-lite college football league will only really thrive in the south and midwest over time, and the tv deals will reflect that in time.

---

Witness AAA baseball.

sycasey said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

The reality is that "pro-lite" works. March Madness is a cultural touchstone that brings everyone to the table from presidents to the coworker who doesnt know what a basketball is. Its bigger than the NBA playoffs, and they only give room to the top quintile of teams to participate and celebrate when the worst-of-those-best beats the best-of-those-best..

---

See, I would argue that March Madness is a good way of keeping the regionalism and weirdness of college sports while still satisfying the thirst for a true "champion."

1. Every conference gets a guaranteed bid, so it's not only accessible to the most powerful leagues.

2. Upsets abound, so even if the elite programs tend to win most of the time, it is by no means guaranteed.

3. The likes of Gonzaga prove that ANY school has a potential path to elite status, no matter how small they are.

The two and four-team playoff systems that FBS football started with were pretty much guaranteed to lock out everyone but an elite few. It's the opposite of March Madness, not a wide open field at all. They could have taken some steps to fix this with the proposed 12-team bracket, but of course the various leaders can't see past their own short-term interests and voted against it.

---

Which is why the B1G and SEC are going to push hard for playoffs based on subjective rankings instead of conference champs.

LunchTime said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

gardenstatebear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Big C said:

---

sycasey said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

This would be a major (seemingly positive) development for the #Pac12 https://t.co/PlEhBk41no

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

If the #Pac12 did, in fact, extend its exclusive negotiating window with ESPN and Fox, the former would have the option to lock up the entire rights package in coming weeks before the inventory goes to market.

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

The #Pac12 can offer ESPN 26 late windows (Fri + Sat x 13 weeks), most of them competition-free. I suspect both nights will play a central role in negotiations & possible deal. Price point might depend on the pick selections.

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

---

ESPN being out of the B1G media deal is GREAT news for Cal. Now ESPN will badly want the PAC-12 to slot after the SEC games and can be a great partner for marketing our brand in SoCal in competition with the LA schools. Maybe more SEC matchups? Our chances of finally getting an ESPN Gameday just went up.

It also creates more of an incentive for Fox and the B1G to want to break up the PAC-12 by offering more PAC-12 schools.

Either way, this is good news for Cal

---

It would mean more night games, wouldn't it? Unless we are in the top 10, College GameDay will NEVER come to Cal.

P12 versus the SEC would not be a good thing right now. The P12 would get rolled.

---

You may right about Game Day, but I totally disagree on the SEC. Having a ton of games will increase the PAC's visibility and allow our top teams to play if time schools. We can't moan about not getting into the B1G then turn tail at the chance to play against the SEC.

---

Aren't we 3-1 against SEC in the recent past (2 vs Tennessee and 2 vs Ole Miss)? 5-1 if you throw Texas in there.

Don't know about the rest of the PAC but it's clear we own that conference!!!!

---

Yeah. People keep saying we'd be destroyed in the two super conferences (B1G and SEC), but recent results don't support that.

The SEC is not only Alabama, Georgia, and LSU. They have mediocre programs too.

---

This is the part I don't get: Shouldn't the long-term plan be for these "super-conferences" to jettison their weak sisters? Since we're looking at a wholesale shakeup anyway, why don't the stronger teams completely abandon the conferences they are in right now and form something brand new, instead of having to share with the likes of Indiana, Illinois, etc.?

Something to do with contracts, I would imagine. But only a matter of time, right?

---

We'll see what happens, but IMO the "power" programs want the benefit of having 5 to 7 free wins every year. If they only had to play each other then a bunch of them would go 3-9 or 2-10 and that would not make the donors happy.

---

Yes. The only way to have perennial winners is to have perennial losers. It's even better when a loser is good from time to time to keep their fans' faith alive or at least to lose by close margins so that games are somewhat exciting.

---

If people just wanted to watch the best vs the best we would watch the NFL. The point of college football is the upsets and the regional involvement. If you have 30 schools and number 30 beats number 1 who cares.

Now...if Appalachian State...a team from a lower division...beats a top 5 ranked Michigan? It happened once...it could happen again...

College football has to be really careful here or its going to shoot the goose that laid the golden egg pursuing short term money to become minor leagues for the NFL. No one cares about minor leagues in any sport anywhere...

---

The truth is the teams that lose are the Cals, but the sport is just fine.

While I despise the BCS and D1A playoffs, and think its the cause of the loss of tradition, the VAST majority of college football fans were clamoring for a "true champion." They wanted to see the best teams playing, and didnt like that multiple groups of fans could spend decades basking in the glory of a split championship. They put their dollars on watching the best teams, not their teams.


It is never going back to a time when Cal could win a "National Championship" along with 4 other teams (Something we celebrate 100 years later, FWIW). Those days are gone so we can know if Georgia, after losing to Alabama, is better than Alabama in a rematch... and people LOVE it.

The things Cal fans valued, like losing a Rose Bowl, or a split Championship don't matter to Cal fans as much as making sure Georgia gets a second shot at 'Bama. And it hurts Cal but not the sport.

The reality is that "pro-lite" works. March Madness is a cultural touchstone that brings everyone to the table from presidents to the coworker who doesnt know what a basketball is. Its bigger than the NBA playoffs, and they only give room to the top quintile of teams to participate and celebrate when the worst-of-those-best beats the best-of-those-best.

The top quintile of D1A football is less than 30 teams. It works in basketball, and even diehard college football fans will never go back to the possibility of a not watching the best teams compete so they can maybe go to the Rose Bowl someday... so why not have 13 weeks worth of the best of the best instead of 2 or 3?

If there was a goose, it was killed for its egg when the demands for a Championship Game won out. Since then the fans have have maybe abandoned their own teams, but they keep spending money to watch the "NFL-lite" teams.

---

Agree here. People are commenting or perhaps lamenting that NIL is breaking apart college football and eroding rivalries, regional play and tradition. But it was really the hunt to find a national champion. The BCS started it. It started to change things within conferences.

It seems like, as you wrote, there is more interest - even from Cal fans, of watching the "game of the week" as opposed to going to a game. Most of these high profile matchups are coming from the SEC or the Big 10. That could change of course. But it seems like most eyes are on these games because they will impact who will be champion.

philly1121 said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

gardenstatebear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Big C said:

---

sycasey said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

This would be a major (seemingly positive) development for the #Pac12 https://t.co/PlEhBk41no

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

If the #Pac12 did, in fact, extend its exclusive negotiating window with ESPN and Fox, the former would have the option to lock up the entire rights package in coming weeks before the inventory goes to market.

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

The #Pac12 can offer ESPN 26 late windows (Fri + Sat x 13 weeks), most of them competition-free. I suspect both nights will play a central role in negotiations & possible deal. Price point might depend on the pick selections.

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

---

ESPN being out of the B1G media deal is GREAT news for Cal. Now ESPN will badly want the PAC-12 to slot after the SEC games and can be a great partner for marketing our brand in SoCal in competition with the LA schools. Maybe more SEC matchups? Our chances of finally getting an ESPN Gameday just went up.

It also creates more of an incentive for Fox and the B1G to want to break up the PAC-12 by offering more PAC-12 schools.

Either way, this is good news for Cal

---

It would mean more night games, wouldn't it? Unless we are in the top 10, College GameDay will NEVER come to Cal.

P12 versus the SEC would not be a good thing right now. The P12 would get rolled.

---

You may right about Game Day, but I totally disagree on the SEC. Having a ton of games will increase the PAC's visibility and allow our top teams to play if time schools. We can't moan about not getting into the B1G then turn tail at the chance to play against the SEC.

---

Aren't we 3-1 against SEC in the recent past (2 vs Tennessee and 2 vs Ole Miss)? 5-1 if you throw Texas in there.

Don't know about the rest of the PAC but it's clear we own that conference!!!!

---

Yeah. People keep saying we'd be destroyed in the two super conferences (B1G and SEC), but recent results don't support that.

The SEC is not only Alabama, Georgia, and LSU. They have mediocre programs too.

---

This is the part I don't get: Shouldn't the long-term plan be for these "super-conferences" to jettison their weak sisters? Since we're looking at a wholesale shakeup anyway, why don't the stronger teams completely abandon the conferences they are in right now and form something brand new, instead of having to share with the likes of Indiana, Illinois, etc.?

Something to do with contracts, I would imagine. But only a matter of time, right?

---

We'll see what happens, but IMO the "power" programs want the benefit of having 5 to 7 free wins every year. If they only had to play each other then a bunch of them would go 3-9 or 2-10 and that would not make the donors happy.

---

Yes. The only way to have perennial winners is to have perennial losers. It's even better when a loser is good from time to time to keep their fans' faith alive or at least to lose by close margins so that games are somewhat exciting.

---

If people just wanted to watch the best vs the best we would watch the NFL. The point of college football is the upsets and the regional involvement. If you have 30 schools and number 30 beats number 1 who cares.

Now...if Appalachian State...a team from a lower division...beats a top 5 ranked Michigan? It happened once...it could happen again...

College football has to be really careful here or its going to shoot the goose that laid the golden egg pursuing short term money to become minor leagues for the NFL. No one cares about minor leagues in any sport anywhere...

---

The truth is the teams that lose are the Cals, but the sport is just fine.

While I despise the BCS and D1A playoffs, and think its the cause of the loss of tradition, the VAST majority of college football fans were clamoring for a "true champion." They wanted to see the best teams playing, and didnt like that multiple groups of fans could spend decades basking in the glory of a split championship. They put their dollars on watching the best teams, not their teams.


It is never going back to a time when Cal could win a "National Championship" along with 4 other teams (Something we celebrate 100 years later, FWIW). Those days are gone so we can know if Georgia, after losing to Alabama, is better than Alabama in a rematch... and people LOVE it.

The things Cal fans valued, like losing a Rose Bowl, or a split Championship don't matter to Cal fans as much as making sure Georgia gets a second shot at 'Bama. And it hurts Cal but not the sport.

The reality is that "pro-lite" works. March Madness is a cultural touchstone that brings everyone to the table from presidents to the coworker who doesnt know what a basketball is. Its bigger than the NBA playoffs, and they only give room to the top quintile of teams to participate and celebrate when the worst-of-those-best beats the best-of-those-best.

The top quintile of D1A football is less than 30 teams. It works in basketball, and even diehard college football fans will never go back to the possibility of a not watching the best teams compete so they can maybe go to the Rose Bowl someday... so why not have 13 weeks worth of the best of the best instead of 2 or 3?

If there was a goose, it was killed for its egg when the demands for a Championship Game won out. Since then the fans have have maybe abandoned their own teams, but they keep spending money to watch the "NFL-lite" teams.

---

Agree here. People are commenting or perhaps lamenting that NIL is breaking apart college football and eroding rivalries, regional play and tradition. But it was really the hunt to find a national champion. The BCS started it. It started to change things within conferences.

It seems like, as you wrote, there is more interest - even from Cal fans, of watching the "game of the week" as opposed to going to a game. Most of these high profile matchups are coming from the SEC or the Big 10. That could change of course. But it seems like most eyes are on these games because they will impact who will be champion.

---

I have never watched an Alabama game, unless there was a PAC 12 team playing them, or it was in the playoffs. I watch the PAC 12 to see who we are going to play, on occasion. Mostly, on fall Saturdays, I am at the stadium or in the parking lot drinking. There are a lot of casual fans - perhaps the 7u0% of americans who did not go to college, or the college kids who did not have big time football. But 1% of America watches the in season games of Alabama. Football is regional - and I am not sure that USC and UCLA are not going to find out how that works against them.

OskiDeLaHoya said:

---

Has anyone seen this rumor:

https://247sports.com/college/kansas/board/103723/Contents/realignment-mega-thread-fka-texas-oklahoma-reach-out-to-sec-168057492/?page=1599#M191353058

Mod on a Kansas board says according to their source, Cal to B1G is "pretty much a done deal"

I know nothing about the poster's credibility.

---

Sources say!

OskiDeLaHoya said:

---

Has anyone seen this rumor:

https://247sports.com/college/kansas/board/103723/Contents/realignment-mega-thread-fka-texas-oklahoma-reach-out-to-sec-168057492/?page=1599#M191353058

Mod on a Kansas board says according to their source, Cal to B1G is "pretty much a done deal"

I know nothing about the poster's credibility.

---

There were some surprisingly cogent comments on that board. One Kansas poster made a particularly interesting point.

The poster made the argument that cal has way more upside than most schools being considered because if you place cal in the B10 (and give them more money) cal could turn into an athletic powerhouse and still remain an elite academic institution.

But if you put let's say okie state in the big10, maybe their athletics will flourish, but their academics will still be sht. (The KU poster used okie st as the example, not me).

ducky23 said:

---

OskiDeLaHoya said:

---

Has anyone seen this rumor:

https://247sports.com/college/kansas/board/103723/Contents/realignment-mega-thread-fka-texas-oklahoma-reach-out-to-sec-168057492/?page=1599#M191353058

Mod on a Kansas board says according to their source, Cal to B1G is "pretty much a done deal"

I know nothing about the poster's credibility.

---

There were some surprisingly cogent comments on that board. One Kansas poster made a particularly interesting point.

The poster made the argument that cal has way more upside than most schools being considered because if you place cal in the B10 (and give them more money) cal could turn into an athletic powerhouse and still remain an elite academic institution.

But if you put let's say okie state in the big10, maybe their athletics will flourish, but their academics will still be sht. (The KU poster used okie st as the example, not me).

---

Cal's upside is about the same as UCLA's.

Is UCLA a powerhouse? Are they poised to become one?

We shall see.

ducky23 said:

---

OskiDeLaHoya said:

---

Has anyone seen this rumor:

https://247sports.com/college/kansas/board/103723/Contents/realignment-mega-thread-fka-texas-oklahoma-reach-out-to-sec-168057492/?page=1599#M191353058

Mod on a Kansas board says according to their source, Cal to B1G is "pretty much a done deal"

I know nothing about the poster's credibility.

---

There were some surprisingly cogent comments on that board. One Kansas poster made a particularly interesting point.

The poster made the argument that cal has way more upside than most schools being considered because if you place cal in the B10 (and give them more money) cal could turn into an athletic powerhouse and still remain an elite academic institution.

But if you put let's say okie state in the big10, maybe their athletics will flourish, but their academics will still be sht. (The KU poster used okie st as the example, not me).

---

Yeah, they're making the same arguments I've made for why Cal would be a high-ceiling program: big alumni base, big market, great academic brand. It's a program that rarely realizes its potential, but the fundamentals are there.

I have no idea if that guy's "source" is real or not, but it's nice that other fan groups can see the arguments for Cal in the B1G.

GivemTheAxe said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OskiDeLaHoya said:

---

Has anyone seen this rumor:

https://247sports.com/college/kansas/board/103723/Contents/realignment-mega-thread-fka-texas-oklahoma-reach-out-to-sec-168057492/?page=1599#M191353058

Mod on a Kansas board says according to their source, Cal to B1G is "pretty much a done deal"

I know nothing about the poster's credibility.

---

Sources say!

---

Wishful thinking - I'd be more hopeful if more message board moderators outside of Kansas' were saying this. Got a chuckle from some of the comments though!

---

Agree. I liked the comments that Cal is a Global brand. I guess they meant Berkeley.

I also liked the answer to the question whether Cal athletics had board: yes but it's more for things like twerking aliens and the best in-and-out burgers.
The poster was way off base it's about the best burrito place.

BTW I was at Albany Bowl last night and ran into Marshawn Lynch's second cousin's friend.
He assured me that Cal was a lock for the B1G. He said he couldn't divulge his source but it was a
"done deal";-)

---

"Funding secured"

GivemTheAxe said:

---

BTW I was at Albany Bowl last night and ran into Marshawn Lynch's second cousin's friend.
He assured me that Cal was a lock for the B1G. He said he couldn't divulge his source but it was a
"done deal";-)

---

Oski87 said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

gardenstatebear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Big C said:

---

sycasey said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

This would be a major (seemingly positive) development for the #Pac12 https://t.co/PlEhBk41no

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

If the #Pac12 did, in fact, extend its exclusive negotiating window with ESPN and Fox, the former would have the option to lock up the entire rights package in coming weeks before the inventory goes to market.

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

The #Pac12 can offer ESPN 26 late windows (Fri + Sat x 13 weeks), most of them competition-free. I suspect both nights will play a central role in negotiations & possible deal. Price point might depend on the pick selections.

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) August 9, 2022

---

ESPN being out of the B1G media deal is GREAT news for Cal. Now ESPN will badly want the PAC-12 to slot after the SEC games and can be a great partner for marketing our brand in SoCal in competition with the LA schools. Maybe more SEC matchups? Our chances of finally getting an ESPN Gameday just went up.

It also creates more of an incentive for Fox and the B1G to want to break up the PAC-12 by offering more PAC-12 schools.

Either way, this is good news for Cal

---

It would mean more night games, wouldn't it? Unless we are in the top 10, College GameDay will NEVER come to Cal.

P12 versus the SEC would not be a good thing right now. The P12 would get rolled.

---

You may right about Game Day, but I totally disagree on the SEC. Having a ton of games will increase the PAC's visibility and allow our top teams to play if time schools. We can't moan about not getting into the B1G then turn tail at the chance to play against the SEC.

---

Aren't we 3-1 against SEC in the recent past (2 vs Tennessee and 2 vs Ole Miss)? 5-1 if you throw Texas in there.

Don't know about the rest of the PAC but it's clear we own that conference!!!!

---

Yeah. People keep saying we'd be destroyed in the two super conferences (B1G and SEC), but recent results don't support that.

The SEC is not only Alabama, Georgia, and LSU. They have mediocre programs too.

---

This is the part I don't get: Shouldn't the long-term plan be for these "super-conferences" to jettison their weak sisters? Since we're looking at a wholesale shakeup anyway, why don't the stronger teams completely abandon the conferences they are in right now and form something brand new, instead of having to share with the likes of Indiana, Illinois, etc.?

Something to do with contracts, I would imagine. But only a matter of time, right?

---

We'll see what happens, but IMO the "power" programs want the benefit of having 5 to 7 free wins every year. If they only had to play each other then a bunch of them would go 3-9 or 2-10 and that would not make the donors happy.

---

Yes. The only way to have perennial winners is to have perennial losers. It's even better when a loser is good from time to time to keep their fans' faith alive or at least to lose by close margins so that games are somewhat exciting.

---

If people just wanted to watch the best vs the best we would watch the NFL. The point of college football is the upsets and the regional involvement. If you have 30 schools and number 30 beats number 1 who cares.

Now...if Appalachian State...a team from a lower division...beats a top 5 ranked Michigan? It happened once...it could happen again...

College football has to be really careful here or its going to shoot the goose that laid the golden egg pursuing short term money to become minor leagues for the NFL. No one cares about minor leagues in any sport anywhere...

---

The truth is the teams that lose are the Cals, but the sport is just fine.

While I despise the BCS and D1A playoffs, and think its the cause of the loss of tradition, the VAST majority of college football fans were clamoring for a "true champion." They wanted to see the best teams playing, and didnt like that multiple groups of fans could spend decades basking in the glory of a split championship. They put their dollars on watching the best teams, not their teams.


It is never going back to a time when Cal could win a "National Championship" along with 4 other teams (Something we celebrate 100 years later, FWIW). Those days are gone so we can know if Georgia, after losing to Alabama, is better than Alabama in a rematch... and people LOVE it.

The things Cal fans valued, like losing a Rose Bowl, or a split Championship don't matter to Cal fans as much as making sure Georgia gets a second shot at 'Bama. And it hurts Cal but not the sport.

The reality is that "pro-lite" works. March Madness is a cultural touchstone that brings everyone to the table from presidents to the coworker who doesnt know what a basketball is. Its bigger than the NBA playoffs, and they only give room to the top quintile of teams to participate and celebrate when the worst-of-those-best beats the best-of-those-best.

The top quintile of D1A football is less than 30 teams. It works in basketball, and even diehard college football fans will never go back to the possibility of a not watching the best teams compete so they can maybe go to the Rose Bowl someday... so why not have 13 weeks worth of the best of the best instead of 2 or 3?

If there was a goose, it was killed for its egg when the demands for a Championship Game won out. Since then the fans have have maybe abandoned their own teams, but they keep spending money to watch the "NFL-lite" teams.

---

Agree here. People are commenting or perhaps lamenting that NIL is breaking apart college football and eroding rivalries, regional play and tradition. But it was really the hunt to find a national champion. The BCS started it. It started to change things within conferences.

It seems like, as you wrote, there is more interest - even from Cal fans, of watching the "game of the week" as opposed to going to a game. Most of these high profile matchups are coming from the SEC or the Big 10. That could change of course. But it seems like most eyes are on these games because they will impact who will be champion.

---

I have never watched an Alabama game, unless there was a PAC 12 team playing them, or it was in the playoffs. I watch the PAC 12 to see who we are going to play, on occasion. Mostly, on fall Saturdays, I am at the stadium or in the parking lot drinking. There are a lot of casual fans - perhaps the 7u0% of americans who did not go to college, or the college kids who did not have big time football. But 1% of America watches the in season games of Alabama. Football is regional - and I am not sure that USC and UCLA are not going to find out how that works against them.

---

Great. Glad you're in the stands or having a glass. My point is that the importance of rivalries and "regionalism" in college football seem to be waning. The quest to stay in the national championship or college football playoff AND the drive to secure greater funding seems to be more important. Yes of course there will always be rivalries - but the ones that matter, at least for right now, are in the SEC and Big 10. Football is less and less regional and that's one of the philosophies that drove USC and UCLA out of the P12.

We badly need to do much better at revenue sports. Being great at aquatics, rubgy, and Esports simply does not register at all in the big picture of collegiate athletics. Our national reputation is clogged within the foulmost depths of the stenchiest, projectile vomit-inducing, disease-infested wh0reh0use 0uth0use.

Quote:

---

LyndonJayhawk1
They [Cal] really don't [fit] in the PAC either. They should join the Ivy. Great academics and terrible athletics.

redblueKU
Academics is the only reason.

All4KU
Hard to say. UCLA and USC's announcement surprised everyone. I guess Cal could, too.

LyndonJayhawk1
Cal will surprise people even more if they do get an invite since they suck in everything athletically and you would think Stanford, Kansas, Oregon, Washington, and even Colorado would be better gets.

---

Nasal Mucus Goldenbear said:

---

We badly need to do much better at revenue sports. Being great at aquatics, rubgy, and Esports simply does not register at all in the big picture of collegiate athletics. Our national reputation is clogged within the foulmost depths of the stenchiest, projectile vomit-inducing, disease-infested wh0reh0use 0uth0use.

Quote:

---

LyndonJayhawk1
They [Cal] really don't [fit] in the PAC either. They should join the Ivy. Great academics and terrible athletics.

redblueKU
Academics is the only reason.

All4KU
Hard to say. UCLA and USC's announcement surprised everyone. I guess Cal could, too.

LyndonJayhawk1
Cal will surprise people even more if they do get an invite since they suck in everything athletically and you would think Stanford, Kansas, Oregon, Washington, and even Colorado would be better gets.

---

---

Your first sentence is true, full stop. We need to do better.

But the rest of what you said, and your evidence from a Kansas board…who gives a crap? We've been bad for the last decade, decade and a half maybe, and still we are in a good spot for conference realignment.

Nasal Mucus Goldenbear said:

---

We badly need to do much better at revenue sports. Being great at aquatics, rubgy, and Esports simply does not register at all in the big picture of collegiate athletics. Our national reputation is clogged within the foulmost depths of the stenchiest, projectile vomit-inducing, disease-infested wh0reh0use 0uth0use.

Quote:

---

LyndonJayhawk1
They [Cal] really don't [fit] in the PAC either. They should join the Ivy. Great academics and terrible athletics.

redblueKU
Academics is the only reason.

All4KU
Hard to say. UCLA and USC's announcement surprised everyone. I guess Cal could, too.

LyndonJayhawk1
Cal will surprise people even more if they do get an invite since they suck in everything athletically and you would think Stanford, Kansas, Oregon, Washington, and even Colorado would be better gets.

---

---

"LondonJayhawk1" has no more credibility than the guy who predicted Cal to the B1G.

Also, as if a large public university on the west coast would be able to join the Ivy League. Stanford maybe. Definitely not Cal.

GMP said:

---

Nasal Mucus Goldenbear said:

---

We badly need to do much better at revenue sports. Being great at aquatics, rubgy, and Esports simply does not register at all in the big picture of collegiate athletics. Our national reputation is clogged within the foulmost depths of the stenchiest, projectile vomit-inducing, disease-infested wh0reh0use 0uth0use.

Quote:

---

LyndonJayhawk1
They [Cal] really don't [fit] in the PAC either. They should join the Ivy. Great academics and terrible athletics.

redblueKU
Academics is the only reason.

All4KU
Hard to say. UCLA and USC's announcement surprised everyone. I guess Cal could, too.

LyndonJayhawk1
Cal will surprise people even more if they do get an invite since they suck in everything athletically and you would think Stanford, Kansas, Oregon, Washington, and even Colorado would be better gets.

---

---

Your first sentence is true, full stop. We need to do better.

But the rest of what you said, and your evidence from a Kansas board…who gives a crap? We've been bad for the last decade, decade and a half maybe, and still we are in a good spot for conference realignment.

---

Let me ask you this: are we (arguably) still in a good spot for realignment because of our athletic performance or despite it? The post was about our athletic reputation nationally. The post was not about our chances for a piece of the pie due to reasons other than revenue sports performance. No sense attacking a strawman.

Question: Are you really arguing our national reputation in revenue sports is not deep in the 5HITTER? That was my only point. Season after season after season, I read dozens of opinions that sound just like LyndonJayhawk1 in other teams' boards (I would say hundreds of times, but Cal revenue sports are not deemed relevant enough in the big picture for more than the occasional joke or insult).

Why do people say 'full stop' and then keep going? Full stop. Put the 'full stop' at the very end where it belongs for rhetorical force and accuracy.

Yesterday from USA Today Rutgers Wire

https://rutgerswire.usatoday.com/lists/it-is-mid-august-who-are-now-the-favorites-to-join-the-big-ten-in-conference-expansion/

It is mid August, who are now the favorites to join the Big Ten?
1. Notre Dame
2. Oregon
3. Washington
4. North Carolina
5. Virginia
6. California
7. Kansas
8. Boston College
9. Arizona
10. Colorado
11. Syracuse
12. Utah

calumnus said:

---

Yesterday from USA Today Rutgers Wire

https://rutgerswire.usatoday.com/lists/it-is-mid-august-who-are-now-the-favorites-to-join-the-big-ten-in-conference-expansion/

It is mid August, who are now the favorites to join the Big Ten?
1. Notre Dame
2. Oregon
3. Washington
4. North Carolina
5. Virginia
6. California
7. Kansas
8. Boston College
9. Arizona
10. Colorado
11. Syracuse
12. Utah

---

LOL Furd