southseasbear said:
calumnus said:
Econ141 said:
southseasbear said:
calumnus said:
southseasbear said:
The Pac has to expand or else it will be on life support when the B1G inevitably goes after Washington and Oregon. I'd rather have SMU (preferably with a partner such as Tulane or TCU) than Fresno.
As usual, wifeisafurd is right: Adding SD St. (likely a done deal), SMU (a probable at this point), TCU and UNLV will strengthen the conference and widen the media base.
What is good for the conference is not necessarily good for Cal (and vice-versus). If UCLA. USC, Oregon and Washington all leave for the B1G, wouldn't we want to be in that group along with Stanford instead of creating a rival to the Mountain West? Don't we lose Utah, Colorado and the Arizona's to the Big 12 at that point?
If we can raid the Big 12 to take TCU, instead of SMU, maybe it would be more strategic for the PAC-12 to focus expansion on other Big 12 schools so they become the weak conference?
But back to the first point, if our object is to be in the an eventual B1G West Coast pod, I think there is still the possibility of a negotiated merger to form a hybrid super league, including all of the current members of the PAC-12. PAC-12 expansion would only make options like that more difficult to achieve.
I understand Kliavkoff's motive for expansion. I just think Cal needs to think about where it wants to end up and be working toward that goal, along with Stanford and probably UW and Oregon, even UCLA and USC. That is why we need visionary leadership, not reactionary leadership or a do nothing like Knowlton.
We are most likely to be left out of the B1G. Their top choice for expansion (which they would do in a minute) would be Notre Dame. Stanford is the most likely partner. Then they might include UW and UO. Not us.
What's best for Cal is to add at least 2 teams (SD and SMU) and possibly 4 (Tulane? UNLV? Another team from Texas?) rather than be left alone with WSU and OSU, begging to join the MWC after the so-called 4-corner schools (actually 4 schools representing 3 of the corner states) join the Big 12.
I'm sorry to break it to you, but other than academics, we don't have much to offer.
You would not be right if this was happening during the Tedford years when our basketball program was respectable as well.
That said yes, outside of a few periods in history we haven't amounted to much athletically.
Still - I think we should close up shop if we don't get into the big leagues. Having a huge academic brand while being associated with SMU, UNLV and the like while UCLA, Michigan, Northwestern are all in one league together will have a reputational impact. At that point just shut down the cal football program. It's B1G or bust guys and right now the AD is trying to drive is off a cliff and be happy with a MWC invite?!? Hell no.
Agreed. I do not understand the fatalism of many on this board. If I didn't know they were long term posters and Cal fans, even boosters, I would suspect them of being Stanford or UCLA trolls.
A future with UCLA, USC, Stanford, Oregon and Washington all in the B1G with all the good academic football schools of the Midwest, and Cal left behind with WSU, OSU, SDSU, UNLV increasing numbers of MWC schools plus SMU and Texas schools the Big 12 doesn't want, we are just supposed to accept that as our fait and even root for that and work toward that as our goal???
If we have a vision for where we WANT to be and make an all out effort to get there and fail, well then we figure out how to make the most of it then. But resigning ourselves to that fait and even cooperating and working towards it…
You guys don't understand that the train is leaving the station. No one in the midwest respects us as a football or basketball program. We are not even mediocre. You remind me of people south of the Mason-Dixon line chanting "The South will rise again!" ("the Bear will rise again because the Bear does not quit!) In the era of NIL and the Portal we are not going to become a power. Even if it were possible, it is several years away, and by then the B1G will have expanded to include Notre Dame, Stanford, Washington, Oregon and some teams in the South or South East. Again, other than academics, we don't have much to offer.
The idea that Notre Dame and Stanford pair to the B1G is laughable at best. This is extreme doomer-ism.
1) Notre Dame doesn't need a pair.
2) If Notre Dame were to break their contract with the ACC, it would very likely start a dominoe effect that would result in multiple teams from the ACC also breaking their GOR, with several teams bolting for the SEC/B1G. I actually see this as improving the odds of expansion to 24 teams, which would include a 6 team "pod" on the west coast.
3) Stanford is not very good at football or mens basketball either at this point.
4) Stanford at their peak success was worth far less than Cal at its peak success. Stanford had a largely empty stadium on years they went to the Rose Bowl. We had sell out crowds for pretty much all of the games we have had with the B1G. Sure, some of that is due to their fans showing up, but that was an option for the Stanford games too and they didn't sell out all of their matches.
5) For a variety of reasons it is far more practical to have two teams in the bay area than one (basketball travel, among others).
6) UCLA has a direct financial interest in getting Cal an invite. If doomsday were to happen as a direct result of UCLA leaving for the B1G, damages to Cal would be far greater than they are now, and it appears the regents are still waiting to see what the damages are if Cal gets a contract with the Pac12 before officially announcing what the penalties already are.
7) Stanford is on record as saying they won't pay athletes, and have the financial ability to drop sports if that's what it would come to. Whether or not they would is a question...and that would be troubling to a league looking to potentially pay players.
Is it possible that Cal gets left out? Sure. Cal has made a lot of really really bad decisions lately with respect to the revenue generating sports that have left them in a bad spot perception wise. That doesn't mean this is at all likely, let alone set in stone, "train has already left the station."