BearGoggles said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

I'm probably in the minority here, but after thinking about the situation for the last several months, I hope the PAC (at least the 10 schools remaining) stays together. Maybe the Southern Branch changes its mind and SC is replaced by SD St. which would work out well by keeping regional rivalries. Alternatively, Southern Branch leaves and is replaced by UNLV, which expands the conference footprint to a growing metropolitan area.

I agree with Pawlawski who said this will hurt Southern Branch recruiting, particularly in the Bay Area. Parents will have to travel far to see their kids play. Tickets to many of the games (played in the midwest, will be expensive. Players can come to Cal where parents can watch their kids play home games close to home and travel to any other conference game for less the $200. And they won't have to worry about the impact of extensive traveling on their kids' academics.

In the meantime, the PAC should screw SC (and Southern Branch if it leaves) but not permitting its members to play them. Let them travel farther for OOC games or else play the likes of SJ State and Fresno.

---

If UCLA were to return to the Pac then Stanford would most likely be leaving. San Diego State makes sense to replace USC, but who would we replace Stanford with? San Jose State?

---

Under that scenario Cal should be the Bay Area rep paired with UCLA as California"rivals" with the UCLA-USC game and Big Game traditions continuing as last game of the year OOC games.

I'd vote for staying as the PAC-10. 2 schools from each state. Better path to the CFP.

However, if we expand and add San Diego State, add UNLV or here is a wild idea: maybe an expansion franchise: UC San Diego. Largest UC campus, great academics, wants to move to D1, can share Snapdragon with San Diego St. and would be natural rivals. The Chargers left so no NFL. San Diego would be firmly PAC-12 territory. It would give the PAC-12 another warm weather location for night games, which is a selling point for the TV contract(s) and fits with tge San Diego lifestyle (plenty to do doing the day).

---

UCSD creating a football team, let alone a D1 football team is a fairytale. Some sports are in the Big West.

The best additions for the Pac are SDSU and UNLV. You bring SDSU in for Southern Cali and UNLV in for Nevada recruiting. They aren't natural rivals but - SO WHAT? Rivalries no longer matter in college football.

---

Agree re rivalries. The question is do SDSU and UNLV bring media and other revenues? I think SDSU does/can. Not sure about Vegas though that has been an attractive market for NHL and NFL. Is Vegas a valuable media market?

---

Poor, pool Cal...@UCBerkeley just can't catch a break!🤦‍♂️

Trying to cover all the debt on Memorial Stadium renovations, amidst the panic & financial crisis from the USC/UCLA B1G departure, the crypto bro alums who bought their stadium naming rights might be going belly-up today pic.twitter.com/o8EPSlH20y

— Tony Altimore (@TJAltimore) November 8, 2022

Stanford's president says confidential conference realignment conversations are underway at Faculty Senate meeting; athletes are around 10% of the undergraduate population, the athletics dept is running a financial loss: https://t.co/vNHRloP36a

— RedditCFB (@RedditCFB) November 8, 2022

sosheezy said:

---

Poor, pool Cal...@UCBerkeley just can't catch a break!🤦‍♂️

Trying to cover all the debt on Memorial Stadium renovations, amidst the panic & financial crisis from the USC/UCLA B1G departure, the crypto bro alums who bought their stadium naming rights might be going belly-up today pic.twitter.com/o8EPSlH20y

— Tony Altimore (@TJAltimore) November 8, 2022

FTX going under?

Stanford's president says confidential conference realignment conversations are underway at Faculty Senate meeting; athletes are around 10% of the undergraduate population, the athletics dept is running a financial loss: https://t.co/vNHRloP36a

— RedditCFB (@RedditCFB) November 8, 2022

Can really read anything into this Stanford story - looking to Big Ten, prefer a solid PAC 12, what is needed for PAC 12 expansion

---

sosheezy said:

---

FTX going under?

---

Econ141 said:

---

sosheezy said:

---

Poor, pool Cal...@UCBerkeley just can't catch a break!🤦‍♂️

Trying to cover all the debt on Memorial Stadium renovations, amidst the panic & financial crisis from the USC/UCLA B1G departure, the crypto bro alums who bought their stadium naming rights might be going belly-up today pic.twitter.com/o8EPSlH20y

— Tony Altimore (@TJAltimore) November 8, 2022

FTX going under?

Stanford's president says confidential conference realignment conversations are underway at Faculty Senate meeting; athletes are around 10% of the undergraduate population, the athletics dept is running a financial loss: https://t.co/vNHRloP36a

— RedditCFB (@RedditCFB) November 8, 2022

Can really read anything into this Stanford story - looking to Big Ten, prefer a solid PAC 12, what is needed for PAC 12 expansion

---

Based on the recent comments from Christ and performance on the football and basketball courts, I think it is forgone conclusion that they will soon be announcing our entrance into the Big West conference. We don't deserve to even be in the PAC.

---

Econ141 said:

---

82gradDLSdad said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

sosheezy said:

---

Poor, pool Cal...@UCBerkeley just can't catch a break!🤦‍♂️

Trying to cover all the debt on Memorial Stadium renovations, amidst the panic & financial crisis from the USC/UCLA B1G departure, the crypto bro alums who bought their stadium naming rights might be going belly-up today pic.twitter.com/o8EPSlH20y

— Tony Altimore (@TJAltimore) November 8, 2022

FTX going under?

Stanford's president says confidential conference realignment conversations are underway at Faculty Senate meeting; athletes are around 10% of the undergraduate population, the athletics dept is running a financial loss: https://t.co/vNHRloP36a

— RedditCFB (@RedditCFB) November 8, 2022

Can really read anything into this Stanford story - looking to Big Ten, prefer a solid PAC 12, what is needed for PAC 12 expansion

---

Based on the recent comments from Christ and performance on the football and basketball courts, I think it is forgone conclusion that they will soon be announcing our entrance into the Big West conference. We don't deserve to even be in the PAC.

---

Is it really up to just one person whether or not our major athletic programs get deemphasized?

---

She retained the AD who has made terrible hires and has gone on record to essentially say that winning is not a priority. These two clowns are deemphasizing athletics because they have the power. They are making it easy for the B1G to not consider us.

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

sycasey said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

I'm probably in the minority here, but after thinking about the situation for the last several months, I hope the PAC (at least the 10 schools remaining) stays together. Maybe the Southern Branch changes its mind and SC is replaced by SD St. which would work out well by keeping regional rivalries. Alternatively, Southern Branch leaves and is replaced by UNLV, which expands the conference footprint to a growing metropolitan area.

I agree with Pawlawski who said this will hurt Southern Branch recruiting, particularly in the Bay Area. Parents will have to travel far to see their kids play. Tickets to many of the games (played in the midwest, will be expensive. Players can come to Cal where parents can watch their kids play home games close to home and travel to any other conference game for less the $200. And they won't have to worry about the impact of extensive traveling on their kids' academics.

In the meantime, the PAC should screw SC (and Southern Branch if it leaves) but not permitting its members to play them. Let them travel farther for OOC games or else play the likes of SJ State and Fresno.

---

If UCLA were to return to the Pac then Stanford would most likely be leaving. San Diego State makes sense to replace USC, but who would we replace Stanford with? San Jose State?

---

This is the first time I've read that Furd would leave if UCLA returns. What's the logic there?

---

The logic is just people making stuff up.

---

The logic is that SC need a companion (and probably was promised one) and Stanford leaving for the B!G would not require government approval, unlike with the State schools. For those that think Washington or Oregon can just leave behind the other state school, that sentiment is wrong.

Money talks, even at Furd. Whether a 100% share in the B1G does that depends on the PAC media contract.

---

The original statement was that if the Regents block UCLA, the B1G will come after Stanford. I think that is almost certain. Maybe Cal and Stanford (with UCLA) if the Regents haven't completely pissed off the B1G. That is my concern with this action. We need to push for what we want, more than just being obstructionist.

You then raise the secondary but very interesting question, if UCLA is blocked and the B1G comes after only Stanford, would Stanford go? My sense is no, they don't need the money, they don't like the NIL era and their other sports and Directors' Cups are even more important to them than at Cal, but you never know. If they go, I think it would be more for the prestige than than the money.

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

sycasey said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

I'm probably in the minority here, but after thinking about the situation for the last several months, I hope the PAC (at least the 10 schools remaining) stays together. Maybe the Southern Branch changes its mind and SC is replaced by SD St. which would work out well by keeping regional rivalries. Alternatively, Southern Branch leaves and is replaced by UNLV, which expands the conference footprint to a growing metropolitan area.

I agree with Pawlawski who said this will hurt Southern Branch recruiting, particularly in the Bay Area. Parents will have to travel far to see their kids play. Tickets to many of the games (played in the midwest, will be expensive. Players can come to Cal where parents can watch their kids play home games close to home and travel to any other conference game for less the $200. And they won't have to worry about the impact of extensive traveling on their kids' academics.

In the meantime, the PAC should screw SC (and Southern Branch if it leaves) but not permitting its members to play them. Let them travel farther for OOC games or else play the likes of SJ State and Fresno.

---

If UCLA were to return to the Pac then Stanford would most likely be leaving. San Diego State makes sense to replace USC, but who would we replace Stanford with? San Jose State?

---

This is the first time I've read that Furd would leave if UCLA returns. What's the logic there?

---

The logic is just people making stuff up.

---

The logic is that SC need a companion (and probably was promised one) and Stanford leaving for the B!G would not require government approval, unlike with the State schools. For those that think Washington or Oregon can just leave behind the other state school, that sentiment is wrong.

Money talks, even at Furd. Whether a 100% share in the B1G does that depends on the PAC media contract.

---

The original statement was that if the Regents block UCLA, the B1G will come after Stanford. I think that is almost certain. Maybe Cal and Stanford (with UCLA) if the Regents haven't completely pissed off the B1G. That is my concern with this action. We need to push for what we want, more than just being obstructionist.

You then raise the secondary but very interesting question, if UCLA is blocked and the B1G comes after only Stanford, would Stanford go? My sense is no, they don't need the money, they don't like the NIL era and their other sports and Directors' Cups are even more important to them than at Cal, but you never know. If they go, I think it would be more for the prestige than than the money.

---

Some take aways from the Stanford Daily article posted this thread regarding the faculty senate meeting:

1) Furd is in discussions with the B1G (this is subtly stated: "Confidential conversations are underway about whether Stanford should pursue conference realignment").

2) Furd and 9 other Pac teams are negotiating for a new media contract as the Pac
3) The difference in revenue between the B1G and Pac may be as much as $50 million annually
4) Furd athletics is running a significant operating deficit that despite all the love from faculty and administrators (something you don't hear at the Cal faculty senate meeting), some faculty expressed concern that the size of the deficit may start taking away from other priorities.
5) Furd has 817 athletes which is around 10% of the student body. [my add is there are around 7,500 undergrads, and if you add non-scholarship players, around 1,000 athletes].
6) Any solution would look at what is best for the athletes given the large number of athletes, The focus seems t be trying to make the Pac work.

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Looks like FTX is going to be acquired by Binance.

This is pretty crazy. I talked to a Cal guy at some point last year who made a LOT of money from FTX equity. I was like - umm I would diversify ASAP because it all seems fake. The dude told me he was basically Midas with crypto and that everything he touched turned to gold and that he had zero concerns. Will be interesting to see how this all plays out and whether it finally causes crypto to collapse.

I will reiterate my long-term price target on bitcoin is still $0.

---

Trying to avoid this thread getting moved to O/T or women's basketball, but the long term target on bitcoin, absent government backing, is still $0. Seems amusing Cal ,with all its in house financial expertise, would throw its weight behind a Crypto firm.

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

sycasey said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

I'm probably in the minority here, but after thinking about the situation for the last several months, I hope the PAC (at least the 10 schools remaining) stays together. Maybe the Southern Branch changes its mind and SC is replaced by SD St. which would work out well by keeping regional rivalries. Alternatively, Southern Branch leaves and is replaced by UNLV, which expands the conference footprint to a growing metropolitan area.

I agree with Pawlawski who said this will hurt Southern Branch recruiting, particularly in the Bay Area. Parents will have to travel far to see their kids play. Tickets to many of the games (played in the midwest, will be expensive. Players can come to Cal where parents can watch their kids play home games close to home and travel to any other conference game for less the $200. And they won't have to worry about the impact of extensive traveling on their kids' academics.

In the meantime, the PAC should screw SC (and Southern Branch if it leaves) but not permitting its members to play them. Let them travel farther for OOC games or else play the likes of SJ State and Fresno.

---

If UCLA were to return to the Pac then Stanford would most likely be leaving. San Diego State makes sense to replace USC, but who would we replace Stanford with? San Jose State?

---

This is the first time I've read that Furd would leave if UCLA returns. What's the logic there?

---

The logic is just people making stuff up.

---

The logic is that SC need a companion (and probably was promised one) and Stanford leaving for the B!G would not require government approval, unlike with the State schools. For those that think Washington or Oregon can just leave behind the other state school, that sentiment is wrong.

Money talks, even at Furd. Whether a 100% share in the B1G does that depends on the PAC media contract.

---

The original statement was that if the Regents block UCLA, the B1G will come after Stanford. I think that is almost certain. Maybe Cal and Stanford (with UCLA) if the Regents haven't completely pissed off the B1G. That is my concern with this action. We need to push for what we want, more than just being obstructionist.

You then raise the secondary but very interesting question, if UCLA is blocked and the B1G comes after only Stanford, would Stanford go? My sense is no, they don't need the money, they don't like the NIL era and their other sports and Directors' Cups are even more important to them than at Cal, but you never know. If they go, I think it would be more for the prestige than than the money.

---

Some take aways from the Stanford Daily article posted this thread regarding the faculty senate meeting:

1) Furd is in discussions with the B1G (this is subtly stated: "Confidential conversations are underway about whether Stanford should pursue conference realignment").

2) Furd and 9 other Pac teams are negotiating for a new media contract as the Pac
3) The difference in revenue between the B1G and Pac may be as much as $50 million annually
4) Furd athletics is running a significant operating deficit that despite all the love from faculty and administrators (something you don't hear at the Cal faculty senate meeting), some faculty expressed concern that the size of the deficit may start taking away from other priorities.
5) Furd has 817 athletes which is around 10% of the student body. [my add is there are around 7,500 undergrads, and if you add non-scholarship players, around 1,000 athletes].
6) Any solution would look at what is best for the athletes given the large number of athletes, The focus seems t be trying to make the Pac work.

---

It still seems that there could be a deal where the PAC-12 negotiates a merger with the B1G to form the Super Conference. It is the perfect time, the PAC-12 TV rights have not been negotiated, the PAC-12 is leaving the SF offices. Consolidate most admin costs in the Midwest.

Football could be split up into 4 team regional pods, retaining traditional rivalry games, but creating interesting intersectional games. Whether there would be a separate "PAC-12" champion would depend on the CFP rules, if the PAC-12 would have an auto bid, then "yes." If not, maybe work with the Rose Bowl Committee to have the CCG be the new date of the Official Rose Bowl game?

The B1G and Kliavkoff would negotiate the "PAC-10" TV rights for the based on the above, nationally attractive intersectional games in exclusive time slots. There would be an agreement to merge the two money pools over time.

For all other sports the PAC-12 could essentially continue as before, as a "separate" league, but with lots of OOC games against other B1G teams.

---

82gradDLSdad said:

---

And there is no one or group with the power to overrule her? I'm asking, I don't know and quite frankly I no longer care. I've mellowed on all sports, not just Cal's.

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

82gradDLSdad said:

---

And there is no one or group with the power to overrule her? I'm asking, I don't know and quite frankly I no longer care. I've mellowed on all sports, not just Cal's.

---

Edibles?

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

sycasey said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

I'm probably in the minority here, but after thinking about the situation for the last several months, I hope the PAC (at least the 10 schools remaining) stays together. Maybe the Southern Branch changes its mind and SC is replaced by SD St. which would work out well by keeping regional rivalries. Alternatively, Southern Branch leaves and is replaced by UNLV, which expands the conference footprint to a growing metropolitan area.

I agree with Pawlawski who said this will hurt Southern Branch recruiting, particularly in the Bay Area. Parents will have to travel far to see their kids play. Tickets to many of the games (played in the midwest, will be expensive. Players can come to Cal where parents can watch their kids play home games close to home and travel to any other conference game for less the $200. And they won't have to worry about the impact of extensive traveling on their kids' academics.

In the meantime, the PAC should screw SC (and Southern Branch if it leaves) but not permitting its members to play them. Let them travel farther for OOC games or else play the likes of SJ State and Fresno.

---

If UCLA were to return to the Pac then Stanford would most likely be leaving. San Diego State makes sense to replace USC, but who would we replace Stanford with? San Jose State?

---

This is the first time I've read that Furd would leave if UCLA returns. What's the logic there?

---

The logic is just people making stuff up.

---

The logic is that SC need a companion (and probably was promised one) and Stanford leaving for the B!G would not require government approval, unlike with the State schools. For those that think Washington or Oregon can just leave behind the other state school, that sentiment is wrong.

Money talks, even at Furd. Whether a 100% share in the B1G does that depends on the PAC media contract.

---

The original statement was that if the Regents block UCLA, the B1G will come after Stanford. I think that is almost certain. Maybe Cal and Stanford (with UCLA) if the Regents haven't completely pissed off the B1G. That is my concern with this action. We need to push for what we want, more than just being obstructionist.

You then raise the secondary but very interesting question, if UCLA is blocked and the B1G comes after only Stanford, would Stanford go? My sense is no, they don't need the money, they don't like the NIL era and their other sports and Directors' Cups are even more important to them than at Cal, but you never know. If they go, I think it would be more for the prestige than than the money.

---

Some take aways from the Stanford Daily article posted this thread regarding the faculty senate meeting:

1) Furd is in discussions with the B1G (this is subtly stated: "Confidential conversations are underway about whether Stanford should pursue conference realignment").

2) Furd and 9 other Pac teams are negotiating for a new media contract as the Pac
3) The difference in revenue between the B1G and Pac may be as much as $50 million annually
4) Furd athletics is running a significant operating deficit that despite all the love from faculty and administrators (something you don't hear at the Cal faculty senate meeting), some faculty expressed concern that the size of the deficit may start taking away from other priorities.
5) Furd has 817 athletes which is around 10% of the student body. [my add is there are around 7,500 undergrads, and if you add non-scholarship players, around 1,000 athletes].
6) Any solution would look at what is best for the athletes given the large number of athletes, The focus seems t be trying to make the Pac work.

---

It still seems that there could be a deal where the PAC-12 negotiates a merger with the B1G to form the Super Conference. It is the perfect time, the PAC-12 TV rights have not been negotiated, the PAC-12 is leaving the SF offices. Consolidate most admin costs in the Midwest.

Football could be split up into 4 team regional pods, retaining traditional rivalry games, but creating interesting intersectional games. Whether there would be a separate "PAC-12" champion would depend on the CFP rules, if the PAC-12 would have an auto bid, then "yes." If not, maybe work with the Rose Bowl Committee to have the CCG be the new date of the Official Rose Bowl game?

The B1G and Kliavkoff would negotiate the "PAC-10" TV rights for the remaining schools based on the above, nationally attractive intersectional games in exclusive time slots. People on the East Coast watching the late night game on the West Coast because their team is playing in it. There would be an agreement to merge the two money pools and equalize payments to schools over time.

For all other sports the PAC-12 could essentially continue as before, as a "separate" league, but with lots of OOC games against other B1G teams, or maybe, the same 4 team pods but with greater emphasis on playing the nearby pods to reduce travel costs. Then, league playoffs (good TV content) would determine the conference champion in each sport.

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

sycasey said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

I'm probably in the minority here, but after thinking about the situation for the last several months, I hope the PAC (at least the 10 schools remaining) stays together. Maybe the Southern Branch changes its mind and SC is replaced by SD St. which would work out well by keeping regional rivalries. Alternatively, Southern Branch leaves and is replaced by UNLV, which expands the conference footprint to a growing metropolitan area.

I agree with Pawlawski who said this will hurt Southern Branch recruiting, particularly in the Bay Area. Parents will have to travel far to see their kids play. Tickets to many of the games (played in the midwest, will be expensive. Players can come to Cal where parents can watch their kids play home games close to home and travel to any other conference game for less the $200. And they won't have to worry about the impact of extensive traveling on their kids' academics.

In the meantime, the PAC should screw SC (and Southern Branch if it leaves) but not permitting its members to play them. Let them travel farther for OOC games or else play the likes of SJ State and Fresno.

---

If UCLA were to return to the Pac then Stanford would most likely be leaving. San Diego State makes sense to replace USC, but who would we replace Stanford with? San Jose State?

---

This is the first time I've read that Furd would leave if UCLA returns. What's the logic there?

---

The logic is just people making stuff up.

---

The logic is that SC need a companion (and probably was promised one) and Stanford leaving for the B!G would not require government approval, unlike with the State schools. For those that think Washington or Oregon can just leave behind the other state school, that sentiment is wrong.

Money talks, even at Furd. Whether a 100% share in the B1G does that depends on the PAC media contract.

---

The original statement was that if the Regents block UCLA, the B1G will come after Stanford. I think that is almost certain. Maybe Cal and Stanford (with UCLA) if the Regents haven't completely pissed off the B1G. That is my concern with this action. We need to push for what we want, more than just being obstructionist.

You then raise the secondary but very interesting question, if UCLA is blocked and the B1G comes after only Stanford, would Stanford go? My sense is no, they don't need the money, they don't like the NIL era and their other sports and Directors' Cups are even more important to them than at Cal, but you never know. If they go, I think it would be more for the prestige than than the money.

---

Some take aways from the Stanford Daily article posted this thread regarding the faculty senate meeting:

1) Furd is in discussions with the B1G (this is subtly stated: "Confidential conversations are underway about whether Stanford should pursue conference realignment").

2) Furd and 9 other Pac teams are negotiating for a new media contract as the Pac
3) The difference in revenue between the B1G and Pac may be as much as $50 million annually
4) Furd athletics is running a significant operating deficit that despite all the love from faculty and administrators (something you don't hear at the Cal faculty senate meeting), some faculty expressed concern that the size of the deficit may start taking away from other priorities.
5) Furd has 817 athletes which is around 10% of the student body. [my add is there are around 7,500 undergrads, and if you add non-scholarship players, around 1,000 athletes].
6) Any solution would look at what is best for the athletes given the large number of athletes, The focus seems t be trying to make the Pac work.

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

sycasey said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

I'm probably in the minority here, but after thinking about the situation for the last several months, I hope the PAC (at least the 10 schools remaining) stays together. Maybe the Southern Branch changes its mind and SC is replaced by SD St. which would work out well by keeping regional rivalries. Alternatively, Southern Branch leaves and is replaced by UNLV, which expands the conference footprint to a growing metropolitan area.

I agree with Pawlawski who said this will hurt Southern Branch recruiting, particularly in the Bay Area. Parents will have to travel far to see their kids play. Tickets to many of the games (played in the midwest, will be expensive. Players can come to Cal where parents can watch their kids play home games close to home and travel to any other conference game for less the $200. And they won't have to worry about the impact of extensive traveling on their kids' academics.

In the meantime, the PAC should screw SC (and Southern Branch if it leaves) but not permitting its members to play them. Let them travel farther for OOC games or else play the likes of SJ State and Fresno.

---

If UCLA were to return to the Pac then Stanford would most likely be leaving. San Diego State makes sense to replace USC, but who would we replace Stanford with? San Jose State?

---

This is the first time I've read that Furd would leave if UCLA returns. What's the logic there?

---

The logic is just people making stuff up.

---

The logic is that SC need a companion (and probably was promised one) and Stanford leaving for the B!G would not require government approval, unlike with the State schools. For those that think Washington or Oregon can just leave behind the other state school, that sentiment is wrong.

Money talks, even at Furd. Whether a 100% share in the B1G does that depends on the PAC media contract.

---

The original statement was that if the Regents block UCLA, the B1G will come after Stanford. I think that is almost certain. Maybe Cal and Stanford (with UCLA) if the Regents haven't completely pissed off the B1G. That is my concern with this action. We need to push for what we want, more than just being obstructionist.

You then raise the secondary but very interesting question, if UCLA is blocked and the B1G comes after only Stanford, would Stanford go? My sense is no, they don't need the money, they don't like the NIL era and their other sports and Directors' Cups are even more important to them than at Cal, but you never know. If they go, I think it would be more for the prestige than than the money.

---

Some take aways from the Stanford Daily article posted this thread regarding the faculty senate meeting:

1) Furd is in discussions with the B1G (this is subtly stated: "Confidential conversations are underway about whether Stanford should pursue conference realignment").

2) Furd and 9 other Pac teams are negotiating for a new media contract as the Pac
3) The difference in revenue between the B1G and Pac may be as much as $50 million annually
4) Furd athletics is running a significant operating deficit that despite all the love from faculty and administrators (something you don't hear at the Cal faculty senate meeting), some faculty expressed concern that the size of the deficit may start taking away from other priorities.
5) Furd has 817 athletes which is around 10% of the student body. [my add is there are around 7,500 undergrads, and if you add non-scholarship players, around 1,000 athletes].
6) Any solution would look at what is best for the athletes given the large number of athletes, The focus seems t be trying to make the Pac work.

---

It still seems that there could be a deal where the PAC-12 negotiates a merger with the B1G to form the Super Conference. It is the perfect time, the PAC-12 TV rights have not been negotiated, the PAC-12 is leaving the SF offices. Consolidate most admin costs in the Midwest.

Football could be split up into 4 team regional pods, retaining traditional rivalry games, but creating interesting intersectional games. Whether there would be a separate "PAC-12" champion would depend on the CFP rules, if the PAC-12 would have an auto bid, then "yes." If not, maybe work with the Rose Bowl Committee to have the CCG be the new date of the Official Rose Bowl game?

The B1G and Kliavkoff would negotiate the "PAC-10" TV rights for the remaining schools based on the above, nationally attractive intersectional games in exclusive time slots. People on the East Coast watching the late night game on the West Coast because their team is playing in it. There would be an agreement to merge the two money pools and equalize payments to schools over time.

For all other sports the PAC-12 could essentially continue as before, as a "separate" league, but with lots of OOC games against other B1G teams, or maybe, the same 4 team pods but with greater emphasis on playing the nearby pods to reduce travel costs. Then, league playoffs (good TV content) would determine the conference champion in each sport.

---

Big Dog said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

sycasey said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

I'm probably in the minority here, but after thinking about the situation for the last several months, I hope the PAC (at least the 10 schools remaining) stays together. Maybe the Southern Branch changes its mind and SC is replaced by SD St. which would work out well by keeping regional rivalries. Alternatively, Southern Branch leaves and is replaced by UNLV, which expands the conference footprint to a growing metropolitan area.

I agree with Pawlawski who said this will hurt Southern Branch recruiting, particularly in the Bay Area. Parents will have to travel far to see their kids play. Tickets to many of the games (played in the midwest, will be expensive. Players can come to Cal where parents can watch their kids play home games close to home and travel to any other conference game for less the $200. And they won't have to worry about the impact of extensive traveling on their kids' academics.

In the meantime, the PAC should screw SC (and Southern Branch if it leaves) but not permitting its members to play them. Let them travel farther for OOC games or else play the likes of SJ State and Fresno.

---

If UCLA were to return to the Pac then Stanford would most likely be leaving. San Diego State makes sense to replace USC, but who would we replace Stanford with? San Jose State?

---

This is the first time I've read that Furd would leave if UCLA returns. What's the logic there?

---

The logic is just people making stuff up.

---

The logic is that SC need a companion (and probably was promised one) and Stanford leaving for the B!G would not require government approval, unlike with the State schools. For those that think Washington or Oregon can just leave behind the other state school, that sentiment is wrong.

Money talks, even at Furd. Whether a 100% share in the B1G does that depends on the PAC media contract.

---

The original statement was that if the Regents block UCLA, the B1G will come after Stanford. I think that is almost certain. Maybe Cal and Stanford (with UCLA) if the Regents haven't completely pissed off the B1G. That is my concern with this action. We need to push for what we want, more than just being obstructionist.

You then raise the secondary but very interesting question, if UCLA is blocked and the B1G comes after only Stanford, would Stanford go? My sense is no, they don't need the money, they don't like the NIL era and their other sports and Directors' Cups are even more important to them than at Cal, but you never know. If they go, I think it would be more for the prestige than than the money.

---

Some take aways from the Stanford Daily article posted this thread regarding the faculty senate meeting:

1) Furd is in discussions with the B1G (this is subtly stated: "Confidential conversations are underway about whether Stanford should pursue conference realignment").

2) Furd and 9 other Pac teams are negotiating for a new media contract as the Pac
3) The difference in revenue between the B1G and Pac may be as much as $50 million annually
4) Furd athletics is running a significant operating deficit that despite all the love from faculty and administrators (something you don't hear at the Cal faculty senate meeting), some faculty expressed concern that the size of the deficit may start taking away from other priorities.
5) Furd has 817 athletes which is around 10% of the student body. [my add is there are around 7,500 undergrads, and if you add non-scholarship players, around 1,000 athletes].
6) Any solution would look at what is best for the athletes given the large number of athletes, The focus seems t be trying to make the Pac work.

---

Perhaps you have some inside info, but I don't read the article ( #1) as you do. It could just be that the Uni is having the strategic discussions on remaining in Big Time sports, which means participating in NIL to be competitive. In other words IFF the BiG comes calling -- not hat the BiG has actually reached out -- do we even want to entertain the offer if that means NIL + travel + everting else that goes with being competitive in the new P2. That is a discussion that any responsible AD should be having with its Prez right now to be prepared.

(Of course, since Cal does not have a P5 AD, no way Cal is having such discussions.)

---

gardenstatebear said:

---

Big Dog said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

sycasey said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

I'm probably in the minority here, but after thinking about the situation for the last several months, I hope the PAC (at least the 10 schools remaining) stays together. Maybe the Southern Branch changes its mind and SC is replaced by SD St. which would work out well by keeping regional rivalries. Alternatively, Southern Branch leaves and is replaced by UNLV, which expands the conference footprint to a growing metropolitan area.

I agree with Pawlawski who said this will hurt Southern Branch recruiting, particularly in the Bay Area. Parents will have to travel far to see their kids play. Tickets to many of the games (played in the midwest, will be expensive. Players can come to Cal where parents can watch their kids play home games close to home and travel to any other conference game for less the $200. And they won't have to worry about the impact of extensive traveling on their kids' academics.

In the meantime, the PAC should screw SC (and Southern Branch if it leaves) but not permitting its members to play them. Let them travel farther for OOC games or else play the likes of SJ State and Fresno.

---

If UCLA were to return to the Pac then Stanford would most likely be leaving. San Diego State makes sense to replace USC, but who would we replace Stanford with? San Jose State?

---

This is the first time I've read that Furd would leave if UCLA returns. What's the logic there?

---

The logic is just people making stuff up.

---

The logic is that SC need a companion (and probably was promised one) and Stanford leaving for the B!G would not require government approval, unlike with the State schools. For those that think Washington or Oregon can just leave behind the other state school, that sentiment is wrong.

Money talks, even at Furd. Whether a 100% share in the B1G does that depends on the PAC media contract.

---

The original statement was that if the Regents block UCLA, the B1G will come after Stanford. I think that is almost certain. Maybe Cal and Stanford (with UCLA) if the Regents haven't completely pissed off the B1G. That is my concern with this action. We need to push for what we want, more than just being obstructionist.

You then raise the secondary but very interesting question, if UCLA is blocked and the B1G comes after only Stanford, would Stanford go? My sense is no, they don't need the money, they don't like the NIL era and their other sports and Directors' Cups are even more important to them than at Cal, but you never know. If they go, I think it would be more for the prestige than than the money.

---

Some take aways from the Stanford Daily article posted this thread regarding the faculty senate meeting:

1) Furd is in discussions with the B1G (this is subtly stated: "Confidential conversations are underway about whether Stanford should pursue conference realignment").

2) Furd and 9 other Pac teams are negotiating for a new media contract as the Pac
3) The difference in revenue between the B1G and Pac may be as much as $50 million annually
4) Furd athletics is running a significant operating deficit that despite all the love from faculty and administrators (something you don't hear at the Cal faculty senate meeting), some faculty expressed concern that the size of the deficit may start taking away from other priorities.
5) Furd has 817 athletes which is around 10% of the student body. [my add is there are around 7,500 undergrads, and if you add non-scholarship players, around 1,000 athletes].
6) Any solution would look at what is best for the athletes given the large number of athletes, The focus seems t be trying to make the Pac work.

---

Perhaps you have some inside info, but I don't read the article ( #1) as you do. It could just be that the Uni is having the strategic discussions on remaining in Big Time sports, which means participating in NIL to be competitive. In other words IFF the BiG comes calling -- not hat the BiG has actually reached out -- do we even want to entertain the offer if that means NIL + travel + everting else that goes with being competitive in the new P2. That is a discussion that any responsible AD should be having with its Prez right now to be prepared.

(Of course, since Cal does not have a P5 AD, no way Cal is having such discussions.)

---

IMHO, NIL is a reality no matter whether what conference we're in. Travel is a bigger issue. Clearly the more Pacific Coast teams there are in a conference, the better from a travel standpoint. But will the Big Ten invite more Pacific Coast schools? Who knows?

---

berserkeley said:

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

sycasey said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

I'm probably in the minority here, but after thinking about the situation for the last several months, I hope the PAC (at least the 10 schools remaining) stays together. Maybe the Southern Branch changes its mind and SC is replaced by SD St. which would work out well by keeping regional rivalries. Alternatively, Southern Branch leaves and is replaced by UNLV, which expands the conference footprint to a growing metropolitan area.

I agree with Pawlawski who said this will hurt Southern Branch recruiting, particularly in the Bay Area. Parents will have to travel far to see their kids play. Tickets to many of the games (played in the midwest, will be expensive. Players can come to Cal where parents can watch their kids play home games close to home and travel to any other conference game for less the $200. And they won't have to worry about the impact of extensive traveling on their kids' academics.

In the meantime, the PAC should screw SC (and Southern Branch if it leaves) but not permitting its members to play them. Let them travel farther for OOC games or else play the likes of SJ State and Fresno.

---

If UCLA were to return to the Pac then Stanford would most likely be leaving. San Diego State makes sense to replace USC, but who would we replace Stanford with? San Jose State?

---

This is the first time I've read that Furd would leave if UCLA returns. What's the logic there?

---

The logic is just people making stuff up.

---

The logic is that SC need a companion (and probably was promised one) and Stanford leaving for the B!G would not require government approval, unlike with the State schools. For those that think Washington or Oregon can just leave behind the other state school, that sentiment is wrong.

Money talks, even at Furd. Whether a 100% share in the B1G does that depends on the PAC media contract.

---

The original statement was that if the Regents block UCLA, the B1G will come after Stanford. I think that is almost certain. Maybe Cal and Stanford (with UCLA) if the Regents haven't completely pissed off the B1G. That is my concern with this action. We need to push for what we want, more than just being obstructionist.

You then raise the secondary but very interesting question, if UCLA is blocked and the B1G comes after only Stanford, would Stanford go? My sense is no, they don't need the money, they don't like the NIL era and their other sports and Directors' Cups are even more important to them than at Cal, but you never know. If they go, I think it would be more for the prestige than than the money.

---

Some take aways from the Stanford Daily article posted this thread regarding the faculty senate meeting:

1) Furd is in discussions with the B1G (this is subtly stated: "Confidential conversations are underway about whether Stanford should pursue conference realignment").

2) Furd and 9 other Pac teams are negotiating for a new media contract as the Pac
3) The difference in revenue between the B1G and Pac may be as much as $50 million annually
4) Furd athletics is running a significant operating deficit that despite all the love from faculty and administrators (something you don't hear at the Cal faculty senate meeting), some faculty expressed concern that the size of the deficit may start taking away from other priorities.
5) Furd has 817 athletes which is around 10% of the student body. [my add is there are around 7,500 undergrads, and if you add non-scholarship players, around 1,000 athletes].
6) Any solution would look at what is best for the athletes given the large number of athletes, The focus seems t be trying to make the Pac work.

---

It still seems that there could be a deal where the PAC-12 negotiates a merger with the B1G to form the Super Conference. It is the perfect time, the PAC-12 TV rights have not been negotiated, the PAC-12 is leaving the SF offices. Consolidate most admin costs in the Midwest.

Football could be split up into 4 team regional pods, retaining traditional rivalry games, but creating interesting intersectional games. Whether there would be a separate "PAC-12" champion would depend on the CFP rules, if the PAC-12 would have an auto bid, then "yes." If not, maybe work with the Rose Bowl Committee to have the CCG be the new date of the Official Rose Bowl game?

The B1G and Kliavkoff would negotiate the "PAC-10" TV rights for the remaining schools based on the above, nationally attractive intersectional games in exclusive time slots. People on the East Coast watching the late night game on the West Coast because their team is playing in it. There would be an agreement to merge the two money pools and equalize payments to schools over time.

For all other sports the PAC-12 could essentially continue as before, as a "separate" league, but with lots of OOC games against other B1G teams, or maybe, the same 4 team pods but with greater emphasis on playing the nearby pods to reduce travel costs. Then, league playoffs (good TV content) would determine the conference champion in each sport.

---

I sincerely doubt the Big Ten would support a merger with a conference that includes OSU and WSU. I don't think they would take those two schools even if that was the only way to land USC.

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

sycasey said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

I'm probably in the minority here, but after thinking about the situation for the last several months, I hope the PAC (at least the 10 schools remaining) stays together. Maybe the Southern Branch changes its mind and SC is replaced by SD St. which would work out well by keeping regional rivalries. Alternatively, Southern Branch leaves and is replaced by UNLV, which expands the conference footprint to a growing metropolitan area.

I agree with Pawlawski who said this will hurt Southern Branch recruiting, particularly in the Bay Area. Parents will have to travel far to see their kids play. Tickets to many of the games (played in the midwest, will be expensive. Players can come to Cal where parents can watch their kids play home games close to home and travel to any other conference game for less the $200. And they won't have to worry about the impact of extensive traveling on their kids' academics.

In the meantime, the PAC should screw SC (and Southern Branch if it leaves) but not permitting its members to play them. Let them travel farther for OOC games or else play the likes of SJ State and Fresno.

---

If UCLA were to return to the Pac then Stanford would most likely be leaving. San Diego State makes sense to replace USC, but who would we replace Stanford with? San Jose State?

---

This is the first time I've read that Furd would leave if UCLA returns. What's the logic there?

---

The logic is just people making stuff up.

---

The logic is that SC need a companion (and probably was promised one) and Stanford leaving for the B!G would not require government approval, unlike with the State schools. For those that think Washington or Oregon can just leave behind the other state school, that sentiment is wrong.

Money talks, even at Furd. Whether a 100% share in the B1G does that depends on the PAC media contract.

---

The original statement was that if the Regents block UCLA, the B1G will come after Stanford. I think that is almost certain. Maybe Cal and Stanford (with UCLA) if the Regents haven't completely pissed off the B1G. That is my concern with this action. We need to push for what we want, more than just being obstructionist.

You then raise the secondary but very interesting question, if UCLA is blocked and the B1G comes after only Stanford, would Stanford go? My sense is no, they don't need the money, they don't like the NIL era and their other sports and Directors' Cups are even more important to them than at Cal, but you never know. If they go, I think it would be more for the prestige than than the money.

---

Some take aways from the Stanford Daily article posted this thread regarding the faculty senate meeting:

1) Furd is in discussions with the B1G (this is subtly stated: "Confidential conversations are underway about whether Stanford should pursue conference realignment").

2) Furd and 9 other Pac teams are negotiating for a new media contract as the Pac
3) The difference in revenue between the B1G and Pac may be as much as $50 million annually
4) Furd athletics is running a significant operating deficit that despite all the love from faculty and administrators (something you don't hear at the Cal faculty senate meeting), some faculty expressed concern that the size of the deficit may start taking away from other priorities.
5) Furd has 817 athletes which is around 10% of the student body. [my add is there are around 7,500 undergrads, and if you add non-scholarship players, around 1,000 athletes].
6) Any solution would look at what is best for the athletes given the large number of athletes, The focus seems t be trying to make the Pac work.

---

It still seems that there could be a deal where the PAC-12 negotiates a merger with the B1G to form the Super Conference. It is the perfect time, the PAC-12 TV rights have not been negotiated, the PAC-12 is leaving the SF offices. Consolidate most admin costs in the Midwest.

Football could be split up into 4 team regional pods, retaining traditional rivalry games, but creating interesting intersectional games. Whether there would be a separate "PAC-12" champion would depend on the CFP rules, if the PAC-12 would have an auto bid, then "yes." If not, maybe work with the Rose Bowl Committee to have the CCG be the new date of the Official Rose Bowl game?

The B1G and Kliavkoff would negotiate the "PAC-10" TV rights for the remaining schools based on the above, nationally attractive intersectional games in exclusive time slots. People on the East Coast watching the late night game on the West Coast because their team is playing in it. There would be an agreement to merge the two money pools and equalize payments to schools over time.

For all other sports the PAC-12 could essentially continue as before, as a "separate" league, but with lots of OOC games against other B1G teams, or maybe, the same 4 team pods but with greater emphasis on playing the nearby pods to reduce travel costs. Then, league playoffs (good TV content) would determine the conference champion in each sport.

---

Kliavkoff is not going to negotiate a deal that eliminates his job

50 million? I thought we determined their actual TV money was about 65m per team and the rest was post season distributions, etc. Further thought the rumored P12 deal would start with a 4 or 5

---

Big Dog said:

---

gardenstatebear said:

---

Big Dog said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

sycasey said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

I'm probably in the minority here, but after thinking about the situation for the last several months, I hope the PAC (at least the 10 schools remaining) stays together. Maybe the Southern Branch changes its mind and SC is replaced by SD St. which would work out well by keeping regional rivalries. Alternatively, Southern Branch leaves and is replaced by UNLV, which expands the conference footprint to a growing metropolitan area.

I agree with Pawlawski who said this will hurt Southern Branch recruiting, particularly in the Bay Area. Parents will have to travel far to see their kids play. Tickets to many of the games (played in the midwest, will be expensive. Players can come to Cal where parents can watch their kids play home games close to home and travel to any other conference game for less the $200. And they won't have to worry about the impact of extensive traveling on their kids' academics.

In the meantime, the PAC should screw SC (and Southern Branch if it leaves) but not permitting its members to play them. Let them travel farther for OOC games or else play the likes of SJ State and Fresno.

---

If UCLA were to return to the Pac then Stanford would most likely be leaving. San Diego State makes sense to replace USC, but who would we replace Stanford with? San Jose State?

---

This is the first time I've read that Furd would leave if UCLA returns. What's the logic there?

---

The logic is just people making stuff up.

---

The logic is that SC need a companion (and probably was promised one) and Stanford leaving for the B!G would not require government approval, unlike with the State schools. For those that think Washington or Oregon can just leave behind the other state school, that sentiment is wrong.

Money talks, even at Furd. Whether a 100% share in the B1G does that depends on the PAC media contract.

---

The original statement was that if the Regents block UCLA, the B1G will come after Stanford. I think that is almost certain. Maybe Cal and Stanford (with UCLA) if the Regents haven't completely pissed off the B1G. That is my concern with this action. We need to push for what we want, more than just being obstructionist.

You then raise the secondary but very interesting question, if UCLA is blocked and the B1G comes after only Stanford, would Stanford go? My sense is no, they don't need the money, they don't like the NIL era and their other sports and Directors' Cups are even more important to them than at Cal, but you never know. If they go, I think it would be more for the prestige than than the money.

---

Some take aways from the Stanford Daily article posted this thread regarding the faculty senate meeting:

1) Furd is in discussions with the B1G (this is subtly stated: "Confidential conversations are underway about whether Stanford should pursue conference realignment").

2) Furd and 9 other Pac teams are negotiating for a new media contract as the Pac
3) The difference in revenue between the B1G and Pac may be as much as $50 million annually
4) Furd athletics is running a significant operating deficit that despite all the love from faculty and administrators (something you don't hear at the Cal faculty senate meeting), some faculty expressed concern that the size of the deficit may start taking away from other priorities.
5) Furd has 817 athletes which is around 10% of the student body. [my add is there are around 7,500 undergrads, and if you add non-scholarship players, around 1,000 athletes].
6) Any solution would look at what is best for the athletes given the large number of athletes, The focus seems t be trying to make the Pac work.

---

Perhaps you have some inside info, but I don't read the article ( #1) as you do. It could just be that the Uni is having the strategic discussions on remaining in Big Time sports, which means participating in NIL to be competitive. In other words IFF the BiG comes calling -- not hat the BiG has actually reached out -- do we even want to entertain the offer if that means NIL + travel + everting else that goes with being competitive in the new P2. That is a discussion that any responsible AD should be having with its Prez right now to be prepared.

(Of course, since Cal does not have a P5 AD, no way Cal is having such discussions.)

---

IMHO, NIL is a reality no matter whether what conference we're in. Travel is a bigger issue. Clearly the more Pacific Coast teams there are in a conference, the better from a travel standpoint. But will the Big Ten invite more Pacific Coast schools? Who knows?

---

Sure, but at what level do they (and Cal, for that matter) want to compete? Do they/we want to recruit the talent to compete for FB and BB championships? Do they/we really want to bid $10m for a 5* QB? (Clearly, Cal does not have the financial wherewithal to be able to compete at that level; nor, does the Admin want to, even if the $$ did exist.)

Regardless, that is the strategic discussion that any responsible Uni would be having before receiving a bid to the BiG/SEC.

---

gardenstatebear said:

---

Big Dog said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

sycasey said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

I'm probably in the minority here, but after thinking about the situation for the last several months, I hope the PAC (at least the 10 schools remaining) stays together. Maybe the Southern Branch changes its mind and SC is replaced by SD St. which would work out well by keeping regional rivalries. Alternatively, Southern Branch leaves and is replaced by UNLV, which expands the conference footprint to a growing metropolitan area.

I agree with Pawlawski who said this will hurt Southern Branch recruiting, particularly in the Bay Area. Parents will have to travel far to see their kids play. Tickets to many of the games (played in the midwest, will be expensive. Players can come to Cal where parents can watch their kids play home games close to home and travel to any other conference game for less the $200. And they won't have to worry about the impact of extensive traveling on their kids' academics.

In the meantime, the PAC should screw SC (and Southern Branch if it leaves) but not permitting its members to play them. Let them travel farther for OOC games or else play the likes of SJ State and Fresno.

---

If UCLA were to return to the Pac then Stanford would most likely be leaving. San Diego State makes sense to replace USC, but who would we replace Stanford with? San Jose State?

---

This is the first time I've read that Furd would leave if UCLA returns. What's the logic there?

---

The logic is just people making stuff up.

---

The logic is that SC need a companion (and probably was promised one) and Stanford leaving for the B!G would not require government approval, unlike with the State schools. For those that think Washington or Oregon can just leave behind the other state school, that sentiment is wrong.

Money talks, even at Furd. Whether a 100% share in the B1G does that depends on the PAC media contract.

---

The original statement was that if the Regents block UCLA, the B1G will come after Stanford. I think that is almost certain. Maybe Cal and Stanford (with UCLA) if the Regents haven't completely pissed off the B1G. That is my concern with this action. We need to push for what we want, more than just being obstructionist.

You then raise the secondary but very interesting question, if UCLA is blocked and the B1G comes after only Stanford, would Stanford go? My sense is no, they don't need the money, they don't like the NIL era and their other sports and Directors' Cups are even more important to them than at Cal, but you never know. If they go, I think it would be more for the prestige than than the money.

---

Some take aways from the Stanford Daily article posted this thread regarding the faculty senate meeting:

1) Furd is in discussions with the B1G (this is subtly stated: "Confidential conversations are underway about whether Stanford should pursue conference realignment").

2) Furd and 9 other Pac teams are negotiating for a new media contract as the Pac
3) The difference in revenue between the B1G and Pac may be as much as $50 million annually
4) Furd athletics is running a significant operating deficit that despite all the love from faculty and administrators (something you don't hear at the Cal faculty senate meeting), some faculty expressed concern that the size of the deficit may start taking away from other priorities.
5) Furd has 817 athletes which is around 10% of the student body. [my add is there are around 7,500 undergrads, and if you add non-scholarship players, around 1,000 athletes].
6) Any solution would look at what is best for the athletes given the large number of athletes, The focus seems t be trying to make the Pac work.

---

Perhaps you have some inside info, but I don't read the article ( #1) as you do. It could just be that the Uni is having the strategic discussions on remaining in Big Time sports, which means participating in NIL to be competitive. In other words IFF the BiG comes calling -- not hat the BiG has actually reached out -- do we even want to entertain the offer if that means NIL + travel + everting else that goes with being competitive in the new P2. That is a discussion that any responsible AD should be having with its Prez right now to be prepared.

(Of course, since Cal does not have a P5 AD, no way Cal is having such discussions.)

---

IMHO, NIL is a reality no matter whether what conference we're in. Travel is a bigger issue. Clearly the more Pacific Coast teams there are in a conference, the better from a travel standpoint. But will the Big Ten invite more Pacific Coast schools? Who knows?

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

Will NIL really still be a thing once the B12 and SEC start paying players from the conference?

---

calumnus said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

sycasey said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

I'm probably in the minority here, but after thinking about the situation for the last several months, I hope the PAC (at least the 10 schools remaining) stays together. Maybe the Southern Branch changes its mind and SC is replaced by SD St. which would work out well by keeping regional rivalries. Alternatively, Southern Branch leaves and is replaced by UNLV, which expands the conference footprint to a growing metropolitan area.

I agree with Pawlawski who said this will hurt Southern Branch recruiting, particularly in the Bay Area. Parents will have to travel far to see their kids play. Tickets to many of the games (played in the midwest, will be expensive. Players can come to Cal where parents can watch their kids play home games close to home and travel to any other conference game for less the $200. And they won't have to worry about the impact of extensive traveling on their kids' academics.

In the meantime, the PAC should screw SC (and Southern Branch if it leaves) but not permitting its members to play them. Let them travel farther for OOC games or else play the likes of SJ State and Fresno.

---

If UCLA were to return to the Pac then Stanford would most likely be leaving. San Diego State makes sense to replace USC, but who would we replace Stanford with? San Jose State?

---

This is the first time I've read that Furd would leave if UCLA returns. What's the logic there?

---

The logic is just people making stuff up.

---

The logic is that SC need a companion (and probably was promised one) and Stanford leaving for the B!G would not require government approval, unlike with the State schools. For those that think Washington or Oregon can just leave behind the other state school, that sentiment is wrong.

Money talks, even at Furd. Whether a 100% share in the B1G does that depends on the PAC media contract.

---

The original statement was that if the Regents block UCLA, the B1G will come after Stanford. I think that is almost certain. Maybe Cal and Stanford (with UCLA) if the Regents haven't completely pissed off the B1G. That is my concern with this action. We need to push for what we want, more than just being obstructionist.

You then raise the secondary but very interesting question, if UCLA is blocked and the B1G comes after only Stanford, would Stanford go? My sense is no, they don't need the money, they don't like the NIL era and their other sports and Directors' Cups are even more important to them than at Cal, but you never know. If they go, I think it would be more for the prestige than than the money.

---

Some take aways from the Stanford Daily article posted this thread regarding the faculty senate meeting:

1) Furd is in discussions with the B1G (this is subtly stated: "Confidential conversations are underway about whether Stanford should pursue conference realignment").

2) Furd and 9 other Pac teams are negotiating for a new media contract as the Pac
3) The difference in revenue between the B1G and Pac may be as much as $50 million annually
4) Furd athletics is running a significant operating deficit that despite all the love from faculty and administrators (something you don't hear at the Cal faculty senate meeting), some faculty expressed concern that the size of the deficit may start taking away from other priorities.
5) Furd has 817 athletes which is around 10% of the student body. [my add is there are around 7,500 undergrads, and if you add non-scholarship players, around 1,000 athletes].
6) Any solution would look at what is best for the athletes given the large number of athletes, The focus seems t be trying to make the Pac work.

---

It still seems that there could be a deal where the PAC-12 negotiates a merger with the B1G to form the Super Conference. It is the perfect time, the PAC-12 TV rights have not been negotiated, the PAC-12 is leaving the SF offices. Consolidate most admin costs in the Midwest.

Football could be split up into 4 team regional pods, retaining traditional rivalry games, but creating interesting intersectional games. Whether there would be a separate "PAC-12" champion would depend on the CFP rules, if the PAC-12 would have an auto bid, then "yes." If not, maybe work with the Rose Bowl Committee to have the CCG be the new date of the Official Rose Bowl game?

The B1G and Kliavkoff would negotiate the "PAC-10" TV rights for the remaining schools based on the above, nationally attractive intersectional games in exclusive time slots. People on the East Coast watching the late night game on the West Coast because their team is playing in it. There would be an agreement to merge the two money pools and equalize payments to schools over time.

For all other sports the PAC-12 could essentially continue as before, as a "separate" league, but with lots of OOC games against other B1G teams, or maybe, the same 4 team pods but with greater emphasis on playing the nearby pods to reduce travel costs. Then, league playoffs (good TV content) would determine the conference champion in each sport.

---

Kliavkoff is not going to negotiate a deal that eliminates his job

50 million? I thought we determined their actual TV money was about 65m per team and the rest was post season distributions, etc. Further thought the rumored P12 deal would start with a 4 or 5

---

He puts the deal together and gets a huge payday. Or he continues on as the Pac-12 commissioner reporting to the B1G commissioner. There will need to be West Coast management. For most sports the Pac-12 would continue as before. The alternative could be the B1G gutting the PAC-12 (USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Washington), the conference folding and Kliavkoff being out of a job with no payday.

It is no different than CEOs negotiating a merger with a larger, wealthier company or a feudal lord agreeing to be a vassal to a more powerful neighbor instead of invaded and dead. The Twitter board and management just negotiated a sale to Elon Musk, knowing it would mean losing all their jobs. It happens all the time throughout history.

Not saying it is going to happen or even be considered. Just that I see it as a possible solution and if I am Kliavkoff, I would be seriously looking at it as an option.

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Looks like FTX is going to be acquired by Binance.

This is pretty crazy. I talked to a Cal guy at some point last year who made a LOT of money from FTX equity. I was like - umm I would diversify ASAP because it all seems fake. The dude told me he was basically Midas with crypto and that everything he touched turned to gold and that he had zero concerns. Will be interesting to see how this all plays out and whether it finally causes crypto to collapse.

I will reiterate my long-term price target on bitcoin is still $0.

---

Trying to avoid this thread getting moved to O/T or women's basketball, but the long term target on bitcoin, absent government backing, is still $0. Seems amusing Cal ,with all its in house financial expertise, would throw its weight behind a Crypto firm.

---

The UC Berkeley Bears field at Memorial Stadium had two naming rights offers on the table. FKX for a few $ million, or top dog for 5% off coupons good only on game date issue. The wrong choice was made.

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

Will NIL really still be a thing once the B12 and SEC start paying players from the conference?

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

Will NIL really still be a thing once the B12 and SEC start paying players from the conference?

---

Once there are laws allowing collective bargaining, the whole landscape in football changes. Think something like the NFL. You need to be in a power conference that is in essence part of the college NFL equivalent, or you're toast (a technical term for being f'ed).

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Big Dog said:

---

gardenstatebear said:

---

Big Dog said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

sycasey said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

I'm probably in the minority here, but after thinking about the situation for the last several months, I hope the PAC (at least the 10 schools remaining) stays together. Maybe the Southern Branch changes its mind and SC is replaced by SD St. which would work out well by keeping regional rivalries. Alternatively, Southern Branch leaves and is replaced by UNLV, which expands the conference footprint to a growing metropolitan area.

I agree with Pawlawski who said this will hurt Southern Branch recruiting, particularly in the Bay Area. Parents will have to travel far to see their kids play. Tickets to many of the games (played in the midwest, will be expensive. Players can come to Cal where parents can watch their kids play home games close to home and travel to any other conference game for less the $200. And they won't have to worry about the impact of extensive traveling on their kids' academics.

In the meantime, the PAC should screw SC (and Southern Branch if it leaves) but not permitting its members to play them. Let them travel farther for OOC games or else play the likes of SJ State and Fresno.

---

If UCLA were to return to the Pac then Stanford would most likely be leaving. San Diego State makes sense to replace USC, but who would we replace Stanford with? San Jose State?

---

This is the first time I've read that Furd would leave if UCLA returns. What's the logic there?

---

The logic is just people making stuff up.

---

The logic is that SC need a companion (and probably was promised one) and Stanford leaving for the B!G would not require government approval, unlike with the State schools. For those that think Washington or Oregon can just leave behind the other state school, that sentiment is wrong.

Money talks, even at Furd. Whether a 100% share in the B1G does that depends on the PAC media contract.

---

The original statement was that if the Regents block UCLA, the B1G will come after Stanford. I think that is almost certain. Maybe Cal and Stanford (with UCLA) if the Regents haven't completely pissed off the B1G. That is my concern with this action. We need to push for what we want, more than just being obstructionist.

You then raise the secondary but very interesting question, if UCLA is blocked and the B1G comes after only Stanford, would Stanford go? My sense is no, they don't need the money, they don't like the NIL era and their other sports and Directors' Cups are even more important to them than at Cal, but you never know. If they go, I think it would be more for the prestige than than the money.

---

Some take aways from the Stanford Daily article posted this thread regarding the faculty senate meeting:

1) Furd is in discussions with the B1G (this is subtly stated: "Confidential conversations are underway about whether Stanford should pursue conference realignment").

2) Furd and 9 other Pac teams are negotiating for a new media contract as the Pac
3) The difference in revenue between the B1G and Pac may be as much as $50 million annually
4) Furd athletics is running a significant operating deficit that despite all the love from faculty and administrators (something you don't hear at the Cal faculty senate meeting), some faculty expressed concern that the size of the deficit may start taking away from other priorities.
5) Furd has 817 athletes which is around 10% of the student body. [my add is there are around 7,500 undergrads, and if you add non-scholarship players, around 1,000 athletes].
6) Any solution would look at what is best for the athletes given the large number of athletes, The focus seems t be trying to make the Pac work.

---

Perhaps you have some inside info, but I don't read the article ( #1) as you do. It could just be that the Uni is having the strategic discussions on remaining in Big Time sports, which means participating in NIL to be competitive. In other words IFF the BiG comes calling -- not hat the BiG has actually reached out -- do we even want to entertain the offer if that means NIL + travel + everting else that goes with being competitive in the new P2. That is a discussion that any responsible AD should be having with its Prez right now to be prepared.

(Of course, since Cal does not have a P5 AD, no way Cal is having such discussions.)

---

IMHO, NIL is a reality no matter whether what conference we're in. Travel is a bigger issue. Clearly the more Pacific Coast teams there are in a conference, the better from a travel standpoint. But will the Big Ten invite more Pacific Coast schools? Who knows?

---

Sure, but at what level do they (and Cal, for that matter) want to compete? Do they/we want to recruit the talent to compete for FB and BB championships? Do they/we really want to bid $10m for a 5* QB? (Clearly, Cal does not have the financial wherewithal to be able to compete at that level; nor, does the Admin want to, even if the $$ did exist.)

Regardless, that is the strategic discussion that any responsible Uni would be having before receiving a bid to the BiG/SEC.

---

There continues to be a disconnect on NIL. Schools are not paying it, and can get into legal trupolbe if they stop players from getting paid. Absent some new legislation, the Cal administration or anyone else at the school doesn't get a say, unless they want to face an anti-trust suit. NIL is paid by donors. As Furd is about to find out, you can be philosophically opposed to NIL collectives, but NIL donors can do whatever they want - you can't stop them. At Cal, the only question is will donors step up to the plate.

---