I mean, look at 99% of the bowl games. The stadiums are empty. It is all about TV. That's where college football has headed. I do not like this. But pretending reality isn't reality is a great way to go from mostly irrelevant to extinct.HearstMining said:TV contract is now the primary driver for $$ revenue. A cozy little regional conference including Cal, Stanford, SJSU, UNR, Fresno, etc, even if you include the Washington and Oregon schools isn't going to have large enough TV markets/ratings to draw the needed contract from TV broadcast. And stadium attendance isn't the success driver it once was.Hawaii Haas said:
We can revisit this in the future. Too soon to give up on the Big Ten dream (or surviving Pac12 plan).
But, a big part of the problem with Cal (and many other schools) is college sports are less part of our lives than before. Most reasonable people would agree that regionalization would increase the exposure we have to college sports with work, family and social. Which is why the Big Game is so successful even in down years for both programs. Cal playing Stanford, SJSU, Fresno, Nevada and Hawaii every year (your place or mine) would do a lot to making Cal football more popular locally. Higher attendance, more regional viewership and following.
This is all lost in the money talk and prestige whoring. Yes, the money is driving this, but…
If Stanford was at our same level, despite the MWC heavy schedule, could that at least be more acceptable. Look in the mirror and ask yourselves.
Pac-12 commish George Kliavkoff visiiting SMU
117,317 Views |
1094 Replies |
Last: 4 mo ago by calumnus
We are of a like mind. I assumed expansion was required to get an acceptable tv deal to save the conference, and have been 'playing along' with that dynamic.6956bear said:I want Cal to go the B1G or for the current P12 to stay intact and look for a future afflilation with the ACC. If Cal gets left out of any realignment either now or in the near future I am very likely just to focus on the NFL and spend my Saturdays wine tasting, hiking, taking in more festivals and going to the coast/beach. Fall weather in NorCal is great and lots of other things to do. Watching Cal play UNLV, Fresno St and Colorado St has no appeal to me. At least as conference opponents.tequila4kapp said:Whoever wrote this has no idea about anything. Literally, among the least informed opinions ever.Hawaii Haas said:
I did not write this, but this is the opportunity staring us in the face. Wake up!
Fresno would be a great add for the PAC. Cal and Stanford would sell out every Fresno home game for years and Cal v Fresno is the ultimate rivalry game rarely played.
Cal is the ultimate snob public school and Fresno is the ultimate chip on your shoulder school. Cal sits in Pelosi's district v Fresno in McCarthy's. Cal is UC v Fresno is Cal State. Cal is Coastal City v Fresno is Central Valley. Cal is 14.4% acceptance rate v Fresno 97.3%.
It's the kind of rivalry that is any marketers wet dream residing in the largest state in the nation. But the snob academics that run the PAC-12 are too +++++ing stupid to realize their athletic conference is in the entertainment business. They deserve to be destroyed for their arrogance and could well be.
Regional rivalries is early 20th century thinking. 21st century thinking - as it relates to conference survival - is about Brands, TV markets and TV time slots. Fresno has some potential value to the B12 because of the markets they open to that conference (the same reason SMU is of interest to the P12) but they have ZERO benefit to the P12.
Fresno State more desirable than Davis?
(The Aggies have a new $40M athletic performance facility, expandable football stadium, and new lacrosse field. Not to forget Med & Vet schools, extensive grad and research programs.)
(The Aggies have a new $40M athletic performance facility, expandable football stadium, and new lacrosse field. Not to forget Med & Vet schools, extensive grad and research programs.)
Nope. Each equally irrelevant to the stated goal of growing/saving the P12.movielover said:
Fresno State more desirable than Davis?
(The Aggies have a new $40M athletic performance facility, expandable football stadium, and new lacrosse field. Not to forget Med & Vet schools, extensive grad and research programs.)
You are high.Hawaii Haas said:
I did not write this, but this is the opportunity staring us in the face. Wake up!
Fresno would be a great add for the PAC. Cal and Stanford would sell out every Fresno home game for years and Cal v Fresno is the ultimate rivalry game rarely played.
Cal is the ultimate snob public school and Fresno is the ultimate chip on your shoulder school. Cal sits in Pelosi's district v Fresno in McCarthy's. Cal is UC v Fresno is Cal State. Cal is Coastal City v Fresno is Central Valley. Cal is 14.4% acceptance rate v Fresno 97.3%.
It's the kind of rivalry that is any marketers wet dream residing in the largest state in the nation. But the snob academics that run the PAC-12 are too +++++ing stupid to realize their athletic conference is in the entertainment business. They deserve to be destroyed for their arrogance and could well be.
I think I'm following the logic here......Cal aka UC Berkeley aka Berkeley sports fans like people on this board would watch Cal in the Mountain West, but the snobby Berkeley aka UC Berkeley alums won't stoop that low.Bobodeluxe said:
"Cal" is not a brand.
UC Berkeley is a brand.
"Cal" joining the expanded Mountain West would give it a chance to be average occasionally.
UC Berkeley wouldn't watch, anyway.
Ok, let's dissect the statement and your inaccuracies.berserkeley said:There is so much wrong with this statement.Hawaii Haas said:
I did not write this, but this is the opportunity staring us in the face. Wake up!
Fresno would be a great add for the PAC. Cal and Stanford would sell out every Fresno home game for years and Cal v Fresno is the ultimate rivalry game rarely played.
Cal is the ultimate snob public school and Fresno is the ultimate chip on your shoulder school. Cal sits in Pelosi's district v Fresno in McCarthy's. Cal is UC v Fresno is Cal State. Cal is Coastal City v Fresno is Central Valley. Cal is 14.4% acceptance rate v Fresno 97.3%.
It's the kind of rivalry that is any marketers wet dream residing in the largest state in the nation. But the snob academics that run the PAC-12 are too +++++ing stupid to realize their athletic conference is in the entertainment business. They deserve to be destroyed for their arrogance and could well be.
First, Cal has played Fresno State and the games do NOT sell out nor do they sell particularly well. The game might sell out at Fresno where they feel particularly bitter towards Cal, but not at Cal where we have more seats to fill and aren't particularly concerned about Fresno.
Second, Cal is not in Pelosi's district. Cal is in Barbara Lee's district.
At least the Pac-12 snobs know how to count and read a map ....
Hawaii Haas wrote that it would sell out every Fresno home game. Well, the poster is right. It sold out in 1995. Back when, then, Bulldog Stadium, held 42,000 seats - it was sold out. And I was at that game.
Cal as snob school and Fresno State as chip school. Partly accurate. We're academic snobs. Fresno State's more mainstream now that it can and will play P12 and other OOC teams. So the chip is diminishing.
I'm not sure there's any bitterness towards Cal. If anything, its the "chip" to all schools that Fresno wants to "play up" to.
As for congressional districts - poster has it wrong. Fresno metro area and suburbs are in the 21st Cong. District. That's Jim Costa - a Democrat.
As for the rest, I think one thing posters on here are forgetting - well, some posters - is that there is no school in the P12's reach that enhances or brings more value to the brand. So, these rumors about SDSU, or SMU or UNLV - they're right - it likely won't bring more value to the brand than USC or UCLA. But value doesn't seem to be the focus anymore, its a regional imperative now. That is the only reason the B12 is looking at Fresno State.
So, if by some miracle the B12 takes Fresno State - what then? We just let the B12 cross a bridge into California. We have to start thinking that if we hear about one move, there's 3-4 moves behind the one we know about.
I get what everyone is saying about Fresno State. There's no upside. But, is there any upside where we are right now?
Go get some fresh air.
I'm not sure if that was directed at me or Hawaii Hass, but if you read my post, I said the game might sell out in Fresno so not sure which inaccuracies you're referring to there.philly1121 said:Ok, let's dissect the statement and your inaccuracies.berserkeley said:There is so much wrong with this statement.Hawaii Haas said:
I did not write this, but this is the opportunity staring us in the face. Wake up!
Fresno would be a great add for the PAC. Cal and Stanford would sell out every Fresno home game for years and Cal v Fresno is the ultimate rivalry game rarely played.
Cal is the ultimate snob public school and Fresno is the ultimate chip on your shoulder school. Cal sits in Pelosi's district v Fresno in McCarthy's. Cal is UC v Fresno is Cal State. Cal is Coastal City v Fresno is Central Valley. Cal is 14.4% acceptance rate v Fresno 97.3%.
It's the kind of rivalry that is any marketers wet dream residing in the largest state in the nation. But the snob academics that run the PAC-12 are too +++++ing stupid to realize their athletic conference is in the entertainment business. They deserve to be destroyed for their arrogance and could well be.
First, Cal has played Fresno State and the games do NOT sell out nor do they sell particularly well. The game might sell out at Fresno where they feel particularly bitter towards Cal, but not at Cal where we have more seats to fill and aren't particularly concerned about Fresno.
Second, Cal is not in Pelosi's district. Cal is in Barbara Lee's district.
At least the Pac-12 snobs know how to count and read a map ....
Hawaii Haas wrote that it would sell out every Fresno home game. Well, the poster is right. It sold out in 1995. Back when, then, Bulldog Stadium, held 42,000 seats - it was sold out. And I was at that game.
Cal as snob school and Fresno State as chip school. Partly accurate. We're academic snobs. Fresno State's more mainstream now that it can and will play P12 and other OOC teams. So the chip is diminishing.
I'm not sure there's any bitterness towards Cal. If anything, its the "chip" to all schools that Fresno wants to "play up" to.
As for congressional districts - poster has it wrong. Fresno metro area and suburbs are in the 21st Cong. District. That's Jim Costa - a Democrat.
As for the rest, I think one thing posters on here are forgetting - well, some posters - is that there is no school in the P12's reach that enhances or brings more value to the brand. So, these rumors about SDSU, or SMU or UNLV - they're right - it likely won't bring more value to the brand than USC or UCLA. But value doesn't seem to be the focus anymore, its a regional imperative now. That is the only reason the B12 is looking at Fresno State.
So, if by some miracle the B12 takes Fresno State - what then? We just let the B12 cross a bridge into California. We have to start thinking that if we hear about one move, there's 3-4 moves behind the one we know about.
I get what everyone is saying about Fresno State. There's no upside. But, is there any upside where we are right now?
I said it wouldn't sell out at Cal and hasn't sold well in the past. Cal's interest in conference partners isn't how well Cal can help sell out their stadium, but how well they can help sell out Cal's stadium. That should be self-explanatory.
And in 1995, Fresno State played at Cal, not the other way around. And the attendance was 35,500. That is far from a sell out. Not sure what game you were at in 1995, but if it was in Fresno, it wasn't the Cal game.
And, according to the US Congress website, the Fresno State campus is in Kevin McCarthy's district, but, fair, the stadium is the only part of campus not in his district. Which is actually quite comical.
I also made no statement on Fresno State's value as a Pac-12 team. I just pointed out the ridiculous claim that playing Fresno State would increase fan interest in Berkeley. We've played Fresno Sate in Berkeley and it did no such thing.
Or, Chairperson of the Fresno State Boosters Club.juarezbear said:You are high.Hawaii Haas said:
I did not write this, but this is the opportunity staring us in the face. Wake up!
Fresno would be a great add for the PAC. Cal and Stanford would sell out every Fresno home game for years and Cal v Fresno is the ultimate rivalry game rarely played.
Cal is the ultimate snob public school and Fresno is the ultimate chip on your shoulder school. Cal sits in Pelosi's district v Fresno in McCarthy's. Cal is UC v Fresno is Cal State. Cal is Coastal City v Fresno is Central Valley. Cal is 14.4% acceptance rate v Fresno 97.3%.
It's the kind of rivalry that is any marketers wet dream residing in the largest state in the nation. But the snob academics that run the PAC-12 are too +++++ing stupid to realize their athletic conference is in the entertainment business. They deserve to be destroyed for their arrogance and could well be.
My bad. I got the date wrong. It was 2000. And it did sell out. Might sell out? Come on bro. Games sell out when San Diego State comes here.berserkeley said:I'm not sure if that was directed at me or Hawaii Hass, but if you read my post, I said the game might sell out in Fresno so not sure which inaccuracies you're referring to there.philly1121 said:Ok, let's dissect the statement and your inaccuracies.berserkeley said:There is so much wrong with this statement.Hawaii Haas said:
I did not write this, but this is the opportunity staring us in the face. Wake up!
Fresno would be a great add for the PAC. Cal and Stanford would sell out every Fresno home game for years and Cal v Fresno is the ultimate rivalry game rarely played.
Cal is the ultimate snob public school and Fresno is the ultimate chip on your shoulder school. Cal sits in Pelosi's district v Fresno in McCarthy's. Cal is UC v Fresno is Cal State. Cal is Coastal City v Fresno is Central Valley. Cal is 14.4% acceptance rate v Fresno 97.3%.
It's the kind of rivalry that is any marketers wet dream residing in the largest state in the nation. But the snob academics that run the PAC-12 are too +++++ing stupid to realize their athletic conference is in the entertainment business. They deserve to be destroyed for their arrogance and could well be.
First, Cal has played Fresno State and the games do NOT sell out nor do they sell particularly well. The game might sell out at Fresno where they feel particularly bitter towards Cal, but not at Cal where we have more seats to fill and aren't particularly concerned about Fresno.
Second, Cal is not in Pelosi's district. Cal is in Barbara Lee's district.
At least the Pac-12 snobs know how to count and read a map ....
Hawaii Haas wrote that it would sell out every Fresno home game. Well, the poster is right. It sold out in 1995. Back when, then, Bulldog Stadium, held 42,000 seats - it was sold out. And I was at that game.
Cal as snob school and Fresno State as chip school. Partly accurate. We're academic snobs. Fresno State's more mainstream now that it can and will play P12 and other OOC teams. So the chip is diminishing.
I'm not sure there's any bitterness towards Cal. If anything, its the "chip" to all schools that Fresno wants to "play up" to.
As for congressional districts - poster has it wrong. Fresno metro area and suburbs are in the 21st Cong. District. That's Jim Costa - a Democrat.
As for the rest, I think one thing posters on here are forgetting - well, some posters - is that there is no school in the P12's reach that enhances or brings more value to the brand. So, these rumors about SDSU, or SMU or UNLV - they're right - it likely won't bring more value to the brand than USC or UCLA. But value doesn't seem to be the focus anymore, its a regional imperative now. That is the only reason the B12 is looking at Fresno State.
So, if by some miracle the B12 takes Fresno State - what then? We just let the B12 cross a bridge into California. We have to start thinking that if we hear about one move, there's 3-4 moves behind the one we know about.
I get what everyone is saying about Fresno State. There's no upside. But, is there any upside where we are right now?
I said it wouldn't sell out at Cal and hasn't sold well in the past. Cal's interest in conference partners isn't how well Cal can help sell out their stadium, but how well they can help sell out Cal's stadium. That should be self-explanatory.
And in 1995, Fresno State played at Cal, not the other way around. And the attendance was 35,500. That is far from a sell out. Not sure what game you were at in 1995, but if it was in Fresno, it wasn't the Cal game.
And, according to the US Congress website, the Fresno State campus is in Kevin McCarthy's district, but, fair, the stadium is the only part of campus not in his district. Which is actually quite comical.
I also made no statement on Fresno State's value as a Pac-12 team. I just pointed out the ridiculous claim that playing Fresno State would increase fan interest in Berkeley. We've played Fresno Sate in Berkeley and it did no such thing.
Oh man. Well, yeah its in his district. But he wins because the bulk of his district resides in foothills and in Bakersfield. That's what he reps. Bakersfield, not Fresno.
And the OP made no claim that it would increase fan interest in Berkeley. He said Cal and Stanford would sell out in Fresno.
I also made no statement that Fresno State added value. But while we're at it - they don't. What I did say is that the B12 isn't looking for value in the sense we are all talking about it - which is media value. Its looking at Fresno state as a regional in-road to California.
It might be Jeff Tedford.Big Dog said:Or, Chairperson of the Fresno State Boosters Club.juarezbear said:You are high.Hawaii Haas said:
I did not write this, but this is the opportunity staring us in the face. Wake up!
Fresno would be a great add for the PAC. Cal and Stanford would sell out every Fresno home game for years and Cal v Fresno is the ultimate rivalry game rarely played.
Cal is the ultimate snob public school and Fresno is the ultimate chip on your shoulder school. Cal sits in Pelosi's district v Fresno in McCarthy's. Cal is UC v Fresno is Cal State. Cal is Coastal City v Fresno is Central Valley. Cal is 14.4% acceptance rate v Fresno 97.3%.
It's the kind of rivalry that is any marketers wet dream residing in the largest state in the nation. But the snob academics that run the PAC-12 are too +++++ing stupid to realize their athletic conference is in the entertainment business. They deserve to be destroyed for their arrogance and could well be.
philly1121 said:My bad. I got the date wrong. It was 2000. And it did sell out. Might sell out? Come on bro. Games sell out when San Diego State comes here.berserkeley said:I'm not sure if that was directed at me or Hawaii Hass, but if you read my post, I said the game might sell out in Fresno so not sure which inaccuracies you're referring to there.philly1121 said:Ok, let's dissect the statement and your inaccuracies.berserkeley said:There is so much wrong with this statement.Hawaii Haas said:
I did not write this, but this is the opportunity staring us in the face. Wake up!
Fresno would be a great add for the PAC. Cal and Stanford would sell out every Fresno home game for years and Cal v Fresno is the ultimate rivalry game rarely played.
Cal is the ultimate snob public school and Fresno is the ultimate chip on your shoulder school. Cal sits in Pelosi's district v Fresno in McCarthy's. Cal is UC v Fresno is Cal State. Cal is Coastal City v Fresno is Central Valley. Cal is 14.4% acceptance rate v Fresno 97.3%.
It's the kind of rivalry that is any marketers wet dream residing in the largest state in the nation. But the snob academics that run the PAC-12 are too +++++ing stupid to realize their athletic conference is in the entertainment business. They deserve to be destroyed for their arrogance and could well be.
First, Cal has played Fresno State and the games do NOT sell out nor do they sell particularly well. The game might sell out at Fresno where they feel particularly bitter towards Cal, but not at Cal where we have more seats to fill and aren't particularly concerned about Fresno.
Second, Cal is not in Pelosi's district. Cal is in Barbara Lee's district.
At least the Pac-12 snobs know how to count and read a map ....
Hawaii Haas wrote that it would sell out every Fresno home game. Well, the poster is right. It sold out in 1995. Back when, then, Bulldog Stadium, held 42,000 seats - it was sold out. And I was at that game.
Cal as snob school and Fresno State as chip school. Partly accurate. We're academic snobs. Fresno State's more mainstream now that it can and will play P12 and other OOC teams. So the chip is diminishing.
I'm not sure there's any bitterness towards Cal. If anything, its the "chip" to all schools that Fresno wants to "play up" to.
As for congressional districts - poster has it wrong. Fresno metro area and suburbs are in the 21st Cong. District. That's Jim Costa - a Democrat.
As for the rest, I think one thing posters on here are forgetting - well, some posters - is that there is no school in the P12's reach that enhances or brings more value to the brand. So, these rumors about SDSU, or SMU or UNLV - they're right - it likely won't bring more value to the brand than USC or UCLA. But value doesn't seem to be the focus anymore, its a regional imperative now. That is the only reason the B12 is looking at Fresno State.
So, if by some miracle the B12 takes Fresno State - what then? We just let the B12 cross a bridge into California. We have to start thinking that if we hear about one move, there's 3-4 moves behind the one we know about.
I get what everyone is saying about Fresno State. There's no upside. But, is there any upside where we are right now?
I said it wouldn't sell out at Cal and hasn't sold well in the past. Cal's interest in conference partners isn't how well Cal can help sell out their stadium, but how well they can help sell out Cal's stadium. That should be self-explanatory.
And in 1995, Fresno State played at Cal, not the other way around. And the attendance was 35,500. That is far from a sell out. Not sure what game you were at in 1995, but if it was in Fresno, it wasn't the Cal game.
And, according to the US Congress website, the Fresno State campus is in Kevin McCarthy's district, but, fair, the stadium is the only part of campus not in his district. Which is actually quite comical.
I also made no statement on Fresno State's value as a Pac-12 team. I just pointed out the ridiculous claim that playing Fresno State would increase fan interest in Berkeley. We've played Fresno Sate in Berkeley and it did no such thing.
Oh man. Well, yeah its in his district. But he wins because the bulk of his district resides in foothills and in Bakersfield. That's what he reps. Bakersfield, not Fresno.
And the OP made no claim that it would increase fan interest in Berkeley. He said Cal and Stanford would sell out in Fresno.
I also made no statement that Fresno State added value. But while we're at it - they don't. What I did say is that the B12 isn't looking for value in the sense we are all talking about it - which is media value. Its looking at Fresno state as a regional in-road to California.
I wasn't speaking hesitantly like I was unsure whether Fresno State would sell out games against Cal. I was being intentionally flippant when I used the word "might" because no one in the Pac-12 cares how we'd help Fresno State sell out their games. It's immaterial.
It makes zero sense to mention that as a reason to add Fresno State to the conference. And your statement that the original poster made no claim that Fresno would increase fan interest in Berkeley is categorically false. Read his earlier post.
Quote:
Cal playing Stanford, SJSU, Fresno, Nevada and Hawaii every year (your place or mine) would do a lot to making Cal football more popular locally. Higher attendance, more regional viewership and following.
It's right there dude. The post is about how adding Fresno State would boost Cal.
Not sure where that quote came from. It didn't come from the post he wrote on 3/8/23 at 11:44am - and that's the one I've been going off of. Since you brought categories into this.berserkeley said:philly1121 said:My bad. I got the date wrong. It was 2000. And it did sell out. Might sell out? Come on bro. Games sell out when San Diego State comes here.berserkeley said:I'm not sure if that was directed at me or Hawaii Hass, but if you read my post, I said the game might sell out in Fresno so not sure which inaccuracies you're referring to there.philly1121 said:Ok, let's dissect the statement and your inaccuracies.berserkeley said:There is so much wrong with this statement.Hawaii Haas said:
I did not write this, but this is the opportunity staring us in the face. Wake up!
Fresno would be a great add for the PAC. Cal and Stanford would sell out every Fresno home game for years and Cal v Fresno is the ultimate rivalry game rarely played.
Cal is the ultimate snob public school and Fresno is the ultimate chip on your shoulder school. Cal sits in Pelosi's district v Fresno in McCarthy's. Cal is UC v Fresno is Cal State. Cal is Coastal City v Fresno is Central Valley. Cal is 14.4% acceptance rate v Fresno 97.3%.
It's the kind of rivalry that is any marketers wet dream residing in the largest state in the nation. But the snob academics that run the PAC-12 are too +++++ing stupid to realize their athletic conference is in the entertainment business. They deserve to be destroyed for their arrogance and could well be.
First, Cal has played Fresno State and the games do NOT sell out nor do they sell particularly well. The game might sell out at Fresno where they feel particularly bitter towards Cal, but not at Cal where we have more seats to fill and aren't particularly concerned about Fresno.
Second, Cal is not in Pelosi's district. Cal is in Barbara Lee's district.
At least the Pac-12 snobs know how to count and read a map ....
Hawaii Haas wrote that it would sell out every Fresno home game. Well, the poster is right. It sold out in 1995. Back when, then, Bulldog Stadium, held 42,000 seats - it was sold out. And I was at that game.
Cal as snob school and Fresno State as chip school. Partly accurate. We're academic snobs. Fresno State's more mainstream now that it can and will play P12 and other OOC teams. So the chip is diminishing.
I'm not sure there's any bitterness towards Cal. If anything, its the "chip" to all schools that Fresno wants to "play up" to.
As for congressional districts - poster has it wrong. Fresno metro area and suburbs are in the 21st Cong. District. That's Jim Costa - a Democrat.
As for the rest, I think one thing posters on here are forgetting - well, some posters - is that there is no school in the P12's reach that enhances or brings more value to the brand. So, these rumors about SDSU, or SMU or UNLV - they're right - it likely won't bring more value to the brand than USC or UCLA. But value doesn't seem to be the focus anymore, its a regional imperative now. That is the only reason the B12 is looking at Fresno State.
So, if by some miracle the B12 takes Fresno State - what then? We just let the B12 cross a bridge into California. We have to start thinking that if we hear about one move, there's 3-4 moves behind the one we know about.
I get what everyone is saying about Fresno State. There's no upside. But, is there any upside where we are right now?
I said it wouldn't sell out at Cal and hasn't sold well in the past. Cal's interest in conference partners isn't how well Cal can help sell out their stadium, but how well they can help sell out Cal's stadium. That should be self-explanatory.
And in 1995, Fresno State played at Cal, not the other way around. And the attendance was 35,500. That is far from a sell out. Not sure what game you were at in 1995, but if it was in Fresno, it wasn't the Cal game.
And, according to the US Congress website, the Fresno State campus is in Kevin McCarthy's district, but, fair, the stadium is the only part of campus not in his district. Which is actually quite comical.
I also made no statement on Fresno State's value as a Pac-12 team. I just pointed out the ridiculous claim that playing Fresno State would increase fan interest in Berkeley. We've played Fresno Sate in Berkeley and it did no such thing.
Oh man. Well, yeah its in his district. But he wins because the bulk of his district resides in foothills and in Bakersfield. That's what he reps. Bakersfield, not Fresno.
And the OP made no claim that it would increase fan interest in Berkeley. He said Cal and Stanford would sell out in Fresno.
I also made no statement that Fresno State added value. But while we're at it - they don't. What I did say is that the B12 isn't looking for value in the sense we are all talking about it - which is media value. Its looking at Fresno state as a regional in-road to California.
I wasn't speaking hesitantly like I was unsure whether Fresno State would sell out games against Cal. I was being intentionally flippant when I used the word "might" because no one in the Pac-12 cares how we'd help Fresno State sell out their games. It's immaterial.
It makes zero sense to mention that as a reason to add Fresno State to the conference. And your statement that the original poster made no claim that Fresno would increase fan interest in Berkeley is categorically false. Read his earlier post.Quote:
Cal playing Stanford, SJSU, Fresno, Nevada and Hawaii every year (your place or mine) would do a lot to making Cal football more popular locally. Higher attendance, more regional viewership and following.
It's right there dude. The post is about how adding Fresno State would boost Cal.
I can't tell the difference between your flippancy and seriousness. And no sh*t no one would care about Fresno State. This isn't about value. Get that through your head. There is no value to be added to the P12 by adding SDSU, Boise, SMU or Fresno State.
But just for kicks and giggles - since Fresno State travels quite well - we could probably get close to 40k into our stadium for a game like that. I mean - we rank 9th in the P12 in average attendance at around 38k for 2022. Fresno's good for about 2-5k traveling fans. Just sayin.
Wait you're a Philadelphia transplant now living in Fresno? That explains soooooooo much. Thank you.
Please give to Cal Legends at https://calegends.com/donation/ and encourage everyone you know who loves Cal sports to do it too.
To be in the Top 1% of all NIL collectives we only need around 3% of alumni to give $100/mo. OR 6% to give $50/mo. Please help spread the word. "If we don't broaden this base we're dead." - Sebastabear
To be in the Top 1% of all NIL collectives we only need around 3% of alumni to give $100/mo. OR 6% to give $50/mo. Please help spread the word. "If we don't broaden this base we're dead." - Sebastabear
philly1121 said:Not sure where that quote came from. It didn't come from the post he wrote on 3/8/23 at 11:44am - and that's the one I've been going off of. Since you brought categories into this.berserkeley said:philly1121 said:My bad. I got the date wrong. It was 2000. And it did sell out. Might sell out? Come on bro. Games sell out when San Diego State comes here.berserkeley said:I'm not sure if that was directed at me or Hawaii Hass, but if you read my post, I said the game might sell out in Fresno so not sure which inaccuracies you're referring to there.philly1121 said:Ok, let's dissect the statement and your inaccuracies.berserkeley said:There is so much wrong with this statement.Hawaii Haas said:
I did not write this, but this is the opportunity staring us in the face. Wake up!
Fresno would be a great add for the PAC. Cal and Stanford would sell out every Fresno home game for years and Cal v Fresno is the ultimate rivalry game rarely played.
Cal is the ultimate snob public school and Fresno is the ultimate chip on your shoulder school. Cal sits in Pelosi's district v Fresno in McCarthy's. Cal is UC v Fresno is Cal State. Cal is Coastal City v Fresno is Central Valley. Cal is 14.4% acceptance rate v Fresno 97.3%.
It's the kind of rivalry that is any marketers wet dream residing in the largest state in the nation. But the snob academics that run the PAC-12 are too +++++ing stupid to realize their athletic conference is in the entertainment business. They deserve to be destroyed for their arrogance and could well be.
First, Cal has played Fresno State and the games do NOT sell out nor do they sell particularly well. The game might sell out at Fresno where they feel particularly bitter towards Cal, but not at Cal where we have more seats to fill and aren't particularly concerned about Fresno.
Second, Cal is not in Pelosi's district. Cal is in Barbara Lee's district.
At least the Pac-12 snobs know how to count and read a map ....
Hawaii Haas wrote that it would sell out every Fresno home game. Well, the poster is right. It sold out in 1995. Back when, then, Bulldog Stadium, held 42,000 seats - it was sold out. And I was at that game.
Cal as snob school and Fresno State as chip school. Partly accurate. We're academic snobs. Fresno State's more mainstream now that it can and will play P12 and other OOC teams. So the chip is diminishing.
I'm not sure there's any bitterness towards Cal. If anything, its the "chip" to all schools that Fresno wants to "play up" to.
As for congressional districts - poster has it wrong. Fresno metro area and suburbs are in the 21st Cong. District. That's Jim Costa - a Democrat.
As for the rest, I think one thing posters on here are forgetting - well, some posters - is that there is no school in the P12's reach that enhances or brings more value to the brand. So, these rumors about SDSU, or SMU or UNLV - they're right - it likely won't bring more value to the brand than USC or UCLA. But value doesn't seem to be the focus anymore, its a regional imperative now. That is the only reason the B12 is looking at Fresno State.
So, if by some miracle the B12 takes Fresno State - what then? We just let the B12 cross a bridge into California. We have to start thinking that if we hear about one move, there's 3-4 moves behind the one we know about.
I get what everyone is saying about Fresno State. There's no upside. But, is there any upside where we are right now?
I said it wouldn't sell out at Cal and hasn't sold well in the past. Cal's interest in conference partners isn't how well Cal can help sell out their stadium, but how well they can help sell out Cal's stadium. That should be self-explanatory.
And in 1995, Fresno State played at Cal, not the other way around. And the attendance was 35,500. That is far from a sell out. Not sure what game you were at in 1995, but if it was in Fresno, it wasn't the Cal game.
And, according to the US Congress website, the Fresno State campus is in Kevin McCarthy's district, but, fair, the stadium is the only part of campus not in his district. Which is actually quite comical.
I also made no statement on Fresno State's value as a Pac-12 team. I just pointed out the ridiculous claim that playing Fresno State would increase fan interest in Berkeley. We've played Fresno Sate in Berkeley and it did no such thing.
Oh man. Well, yeah its in his district. But he wins because the bulk of his district resides in foothills and in Bakersfield. That's what he reps. Bakersfield, not Fresno.
And the OP made no claim that it would increase fan interest in Berkeley. He said Cal and Stanford would sell out in Fresno.
I also made no statement that Fresno State added value. But while we're at it - they don't. What I did say is that the B12 isn't looking for value in the sense we are all talking about it - which is media value. Its looking at Fresno state as a regional in-road to California.
I wasn't speaking hesitantly like I was unsure whether Fresno State would sell out games against Cal. I was being intentionally flippant when I used the word "might" because no one in the Pac-12 cares how we'd help Fresno State sell out their games. It's immaterial.
It makes zero sense to mention that as a reason to add Fresno State to the conference. And your statement that the original poster made no claim that Fresno would increase fan interest in Berkeley is categorically false. Read his earlier post.Quote:
Cal playing Stanford, SJSU, Fresno, Nevada and Hawaii every year (your place or mine) would do a lot to making Cal football more popular locally. Higher attendance, more regional viewership and following.
It's right there dude. The post is about how adding Fresno State would boost Cal.
I can't tell the difference between your flippancy and seriousness. And no sh*t no one would care about Fresno State. This isn't about value. Get that through your head. There is no value to be added to the P12 by adding SDSU, Boise, SMU or Fresno State.
But just for kicks and giggles - since Fresno State travels quite well - we could probably get close to 40k into our stadium for a game like that. I mean - we rank 9th in the P12 in average attendance at around 38k for 2022. Fresno's good for about 2-5k traveling fans. Just sayin.
I asked around and 15K-20K travel to LA for the games there (USC? UCLA?) for Fresno fans. Bay Area might be closer central CA population centers.
I'm not the president of the Fresno St fan club. I'm a Hawaii and Cal fan.
I don't see what I'm writing about embracing possible regionalization is any different from the Dennis Dodd article thread that Cal and Stanford stays in the P12. The result would be the same, the P12 taking the best MWC teams.
At least, I'm trying to put a positive spin on an obvious crappy monetary loss from ****tier media deal.
The fact that we have to look back at 1995 to see Fresno or San Jose St playing at Cal - that's a problem.
I think in people's minds the CA4 teams (Cal, Stanford, USC, UCLA) is a rivalry for the state, but it's a smaller sliver of concern for most in CA. California college football could have way more relevance to more Californians if the Cal States and Nevada-Reno, and even UNLV with a sprinkle of Hawaii.
This is the situation if the P12 falls apart. But also a part of why the P12 is less relevant to its fan base, and I'm talking about not just alumni but more regular sports fans (ie NFL fans).
Why would anyone object to transitioning from a national team to a regional one?Hawaii Haas said:philly1121 said:Not sure where that quote came from. It didn't come from the post he wrote on 3/8/23 at 11:44am - and that's the one I've been going off of. Since you brought categories into this.berserkeley said:philly1121 said:My bad. I got the date wrong. It was 2000. And it did sell out. Might sell out? Come on bro. Games sell out when San Diego State comes here.berserkeley said:I'm not sure if that was directed at me or Hawaii Hass, but if you read my post, I said the game might sell out in Fresno so not sure which inaccuracies you're referring to there.philly1121 said:Ok, let's dissect the statement and your inaccuracies.berserkeley said:There is so much wrong with this statement.Hawaii Haas said:
I did not write this, but this is the opportunity staring us in the face. Wake up!
Fresno would be a great add for the PAC. Cal and Stanford would sell out every Fresno home game for years and Cal v Fresno is the ultimate rivalry game rarely played.
Cal is the ultimate snob public school and Fresno is the ultimate chip on your shoulder school. Cal sits in Pelosi's district v Fresno in McCarthy's. Cal is UC v Fresno is Cal State. Cal is Coastal City v Fresno is Central Valley. Cal is 14.4% acceptance rate v Fresno 97.3%.
It's the kind of rivalry that is any marketers wet dream residing in the largest state in the nation. But the snob academics that run the PAC-12 are too +++++ing stupid to realize their athletic conference is in the entertainment business. They deserve to be destroyed for their arrogance and could well be.
First, Cal has played Fresno State and the games do NOT sell out nor do they sell particularly well. The game might sell out at Fresno where they feel particularly bitter towards Cal, but not at Cal where we have more seats to fill and aren't particularly concerned about Fresno.
Second, Cal is not in Pelosi's district. Cal is in Barbara Lee's district.
At least the Pac-12 snobs know how to count and read a map ....
Hawaii Haas wrote that it would sell out every Fresno home game. Well, the poster is right. It sold out in 1995. Back when, then, Bulldog Stadium, held 42,000 seats - it was sold out. And I was at that game.
Cal as snob school and Fresno State as chip school. Partly accurate. We're academic snobs. Fresno State's more mainstream now that it can and will play P12 and other OOC teams. So the chip is diminishing.
I'm not sure there's any bitterness towards Cal. If anything, its the "chip" to all schools that Fresno wants to "play up" to.
As for congressional districts - poster has it wrong. Fresno metro area and suburbs are in the 21st Cong. District. That's Jim Costa - a Democrat.
As for the rest, I think one thing posters on here are forgetting - well, some posters - is that there is no school in the P12's reach that enhances or brings more value to the brand. So, these rumors about SDSU, or SMU or UNLV - they're right - it likely won't bring more value to the brand than USC or UCLA. But value doesn't seem to be the focus anymore, its a regional imperative now. That is the only reason the B12 is looking at Fresno State.
So, if by some miracle the B12 takes Fresno State - what then? We just let the B12 cross a bridge into California. We have to start thinking that if we hear about one move, there's 3-4 moves behind the one we know about.
I get what everyone is saying about Fresno State. There's no upside. But, is there any upside where we are right now?
I said it wouldn't sell out at Cal and hasn't sold well in the past. Cal's interest in conference partners isn't how well Cal can help sell out their stadium, but how well they can help sell out Cal's stadium. That should be self-explanatory.
And in 1995, Fresno State played at Cal, not the other way around. And the attendance was 35,500. That is far from a sell out. Not sure what game you were at in 1995, but if it was in Fresno, it wasn't the Cal game.
And, according to the US Congress website, the Fresno State campus is in Kevin McCarthy's district, but, fair, the stadium is the only part of campus not in his district. Which is actually quite comical.
I also made no statement on Fresno State's value as a Pac-12 team. I just pointed out the ridiculous claim that playing Fresno State would increase fan interest in Berkeley. We've played Fresno Sate in Berkeley and it did no such thing.
Oh man. Well, yeah its in his district. But he wins because the bulk of his district resides in foothills and in Bakersfield. That's what he reps. Bakersfield, not Fresno.
And the OP made no claim that it would increase fan interest in Berkeley. He said Cal and Stanford would sell out in Fresno.
I also made no statement that Fresno State added value. But while we're at it - they don't. What I did say is that the B12 isn't looking for value in the sense we are all talking about it - which is media value. Its looking at Fresno state as a regional in-road to California.
I wasn't speaking hesitantly like I was unsure whether Fresno State would sell out games against Cal. I was being intentionally flippant when I used the word "might" because no one in the Pac-12 cares how we'd help Fresno State sell out their games. It's immaterial.
It makes zero sense to mention that as a reason to add Fresno State to the conference. And your statement that the original poster made no claim that Fresno would increase fan interest in Berkeley is categorically false. Read his earlier post.Quote:
Cal playing Stanford, SJSU, Fresno, Nevada and Hawaii every year (your place or mine) would do a lot to making Cal football more popular locally. Higher attendance, more regional viewership and following.
It's right there dude. The post is about how adding Fresno State would boost Cal.
I can't tell the difference between your flippancy and seriousness. And no sh*t no one would care about Fresno State. This isn't about value. Get that through your head. There is no value to be added to the P12 by adding SDSU, Boise, SMU or Fresno State.
But just for kicks and giggles - since Fresno State travels quite well - we could probably get close to 40k into our stadium for a game like that. I mean - we rank 9th in the P12 in average attendance at around 38k for 2022. Fresno's good for about 2-5k traveling fans. Just sayin.
I asked around and 15K-20K travel to LA for the games there (USC? UCLA?) for Fresno fans. Bay Area might be closer central CA population centers.
I'm not the president of the Fresno St fan club. I'm a Hawaii and Cal fan.
I don't see what I'm writing about embracing possible regionalization is any different from the Dennis Dodd article thread that Cal and Stanford stays in the P12. The result would be the same, the P12 taking the best MWC teams.
At least, I'm trying to put a positive spin on an obvious crappy monetary loss from ****tier media deal.
The fact that we have to look back at 1995 to see Fresno or San Jose St playing at Cal - that's a problem.
I think in people's minds the CA4 teams (Cal, Stanford, USC, UCLA) is a rivalry for the state, but it's a smaller sliver of concern for most in CA. California college football could have way more relevance to more Californians if the Cal States and Nevada-Reno, and even UNLV with a sprinkle of Hawaii.
This is the situation if the P12 falls apart. But also a part of why the P12 is less relevant to its fan base, and I'm talking about not just alumni but more regular sports fans (ie NFL fans).
Fire Knowlton!
Fire Fox!
Put Wilcox in a hot seat!
Fire Fox!
Put Wilcox in a hot seat!
philly1121 said:Not sure where that quote came from. It didn't come from the post he wrote on 3/8/23 at 11:44am - and that's the one I've been going off of. Since you brought categories into this.berserkeley said:philly1121 said:My bad. I got the date wrong. It was 2000. And it did sell out. Might sell out? Come on bro. Games sell out when San Diego State comes here.berserkeley said:I'm not sure if that was directed at me or Hawaii Hass, but if you read my post, I said the game might sell out in Fresno so not sure which inaccuracies you're referring to there.philly1121 said:Ok, let's dissect the statement and your inaccuracies.berserkeley said:There is so much wrong with this statement.Hawaii Haas said:
I did not write this, but this is the opportunity staring us in the face. Wake up!
Fresno would be a great add for the PAC. Cal and Stanford would sell out every Fresno home game for years and Cal v Fresno is the ultimate rivalry game rarely played.
Cal is the ultimate snob public school and Fresno is the ultimate chip on your shoulder school. Cal sits in Pelosi's district v Fresno in McCarthy's. Cal is UC v Fresno is Cal State. Cal is Coastal City v Fresno is Central Valley. Cal is 14.4% acceptance rate v Fresno 97.3%.
It's the kind of rivalry that is any marketers wet dream residing in the largest state in the nation. But the snob academics that run the PAC-12 are too +++++ing stupid to realize their athletic conference is in the entertainment business. They deserve to be destroyed for their arrogance and could well be.
First, Cal has played Fresno State and the games do NOT sell out nor do they sell particularly well. The game might sell out at Fresno where they feel particularly bitter towards Cal, but not at Cal where we have more seats to fill and aren't particularly concerned about Fresno.
Second, Cal is not in Pelosi's district. Cal is in Barbara Lee's district.
At least the Pac-12 snobs know how to count and read a map ....
Hawaii Haas wrote that it would sell out every Fresno home game. Well, the poster is right. It sold out in 1995. Back when, then, Bulldog Stadium, held 42,000 seats - it was sold out. And I was at that game.
Cal as snob school and Fresno State as chip school. Partly accurate. We're academic snobs. Fresno State's more mainstream now that it can and will play P12 and other OOC teams. So the chip is diminishing.
I'm not sure there's any bitterness towards Cal. If anything, its the "chip" to all schools that Fresno wants to "play up" to.
As for congressional districts - poster has it wrong. Fresno metro area and suburbs are in the 21st Cong. District. That's Jim Costa - a Democrat.
As for the rest, I think one thing posters on here are forgetting - well, some posters - is that there is no school in the P12's reach that enhances or brings more value to the brand. So, these rumors about SDSU, or SMU or UNLV - they're right - it likely won't bring more value to the brand than USC or UCLA. But value doesn't seem to be the focus anymore, its a regional imperative now. That is the only reason the B12 is looking at Fresno State.
So, if by some miracle the B12 takes Fresno State - what then? We just let the B12 cross a bridge into California. We have to start thinking that if we hear about one move, there's 3-4 moves behind the one we know about.
I get what everyone is saying about Fresno State. There's no upside. But, is there any upside where we are right now?
I said it wouldn't sell out at Cal and hasn't sold well in the past. Cal's interest in conference partners isn't how well Cal can help sell out their stadium, but how well they can help sell out Cal's stadium. That should be self-explanatory.
And in 1995, Fresno State played at Cal, not the other way around. And the attendance was 35,500. That is far from a sell out. Not sure what game you were at in 1995, but if it was in Fresno, it wasn't the Cal game.
And, according to the US Congress website, the Fresno State campus is in Kevin McCarthy's district, but, fair, the stadium is the only part of campus not in his district. Which is actually quite comical.
I also made no statement on Fresno State's value as a Pac-12 team. I just pointed out the ridiculous claim that playing Fresno State would increase fan interest in Berkeley. We've played Fresno Sate in Berkeley and it did no such thing.
Oh man. Well, yeah its in his district. But he wins because the bulk of his district resides in foothills and in Bakersfield. That's what he reps. Bakersfield, not Fresno.
And the OP made no claim that it would increase fan interest in Berkeley. He said Cal and Stanford would sell out in Fresno.
I also made no statement that Fresno State added value. But while we're at it - they don't. What I did say is that the B12 isn't looking for value in the sense we are all talking about it - which is media value. Its looking at Fresno state as a regional in-road to California.
I wasn't speaking hesitantly like I was unsure whether Fresno State would sell out games against Cal. I was being intentionally flippant when I used the word "might" because no one in the Pac-12 cares how we'd help Fresno State sell out their games. It's immaterial.
It makes zero sense to mention that as a reason to add Fresno State to the conference. And your statement that the original poster made no claim that Fresno would increase fan interest in Berkeley is categorically false. Read his earlier post.Quote:
Cal playing Stanford, SJSU, Fresno, Nevada and Hawaii every year (your place or mine) would do a lot to making Cal football more popular locally. Higher attendance, more regional viewership and following.
It's right there dude. The post is about how adding Fresno State would boost Cal.
I can't tell the difference between your flippancy and seriousness. And no sh*t no one would care about Fresno State. This isn't about value. Get that through your head. There is no value to be added to the P12 by adding SDSU, Boise, SMU or Fresno State.
But just for kicks and giggles - since Fresno State travels quite well - we could probably get close to 40k into our stadium for a game like that. I mean - we rank 9th in the P12 in average attendance at around 38k for 2022. Fresno's good for about 2-5k traveling fans. Just sayin.
I got that from the post on 3/8 at 2:19 pm. It's literally two posts above the one I replied to. It's really not that hard to find.
Get this through your head. "Cal and Stanford will sell out every Fresno home game" is saying that Cal and Stanford will sell out their home games against Fresno. Not the other way around. Because that's what those words mean.
And it you don't understand that, use context clues. First, the preceding statement says it's a reason the Pac-12 should add Fresno. Helping Fresno sell out their games is not a reason the Pac-12 would add them. Fresno helping Cal and Stanford sell tickets would be a reason the Pac-12 should add them. If it were true. And if you just look up two posts, you will see he is CLEARLY talking about Fresno helping Cal sell out Cal games.
And get this through your head. I am not talking about whether any team would add value to the Pac-12. I am ONLY talking about whether more Cal fans will show up to watch Fresno than Cal. You continue to interject talking points that have no bearing on anything I've said. Stop it.
You're arguing over words you've misread and you continue to argue even after it's been proven that you misread them.
Well. We will see. I expect Mountain West. Many don't.
Dude you're so sped. Your entire implication is that Fresno State is a crap team from a crap region that shouldn't even be near Cal. Get THIS through your head - we are not the center of the universe. No one cares about us except our own myopic alumni who think we are one win away from lasting greatness.
I'm so tired of your double talk. Believe whatever you want dude. Peace
I'm so tired of your double talk. Believe whatever you want dude. Peace
WalterSobchak said:
Wait you're a Philadelphia transplant now living in Fresno? That explains soooooooo much. Thank you.
Among the many sh*t posts you upload, this one is the worst. Well - it could be. How long you been on this board? 3 months? That explains so much about you Wally. Ridiculous
tbf, even if selling more tickets was a result it won't matter bcos its all about media rights. And if Fresno State is accretive to the deal, sure add them, but if it's not they don't get an invite. (And since they have no invite, I can only assume that Fresno State would not be accretive.)berserkeley said:philly1121 said:Not sure where that quote came from. It didn't come from the post he wrote on 3/8/23 at 11:44am - and that's the one I've been going off of. Since you brought categories into this.berserkeley said:philly1121 said:My bad. I got the date wrong. It was 2000. And it did sell out. Might sell out? Come on bro. Games sell out when San Diego State comes here.berserkeley said:I'm not sure if that was directed at me or Hawaii Hass, but if you read my post, I said the game might sell out in Fresno so not sure which inaccuracies you're referring to there.philly1121 said:Ok, let's dissect the statement and your inaccuracies.berserkeley said:There is so much wrong with this statement.Hawaii Haas said:
I did not write this, but this is the opportunity staring us in the face. Wake up!
Fresno would be a great add for the PAC. Cal and Stanford would sell out every Fresno home game for years and Cal v Fresno is the ultimate rivalry game rarely played.
Cal is the ultimate snob public school and Fresno is the ultimate chip on your shoulder school. Cal sits in Pelosi's district v Fresno in McCarthy's. Cal is UC v Fresno is Cal State. Cal is Coastal City v Fresno is Central Valley. Cal is 14.4% acceptance rate v Fresno 97.3%.
It's the kind of rivalry that is any marketers wet dream residing in the largest state in the nation. But the snob academics that run the PAC-12 are too +++++ing stupid to realize their athletic conference is in the entertainment business. They deserve to be destroyed for their arrogance and could well be.
First, Cal has played Fresno State and the games do NOT sell out nor do they sell particularly well. The game might sell out at Fresno where they feel particularly bitter towards Cal, but not at Cal where we have more seats to fill and aren't particularly concerned about Fresno.
Second, Cal is not in Pelosi's district. Cal is in Barbara Lee's district.
At least the Pac-12 snobs know how to count and read a map ....
Hawaii Haas wrote that it would sell out every Fresno home game. Well, the poster is right. It sold out in 1995. Back when, then, Bulldog Stadium, held 42,000 seats - it was sold out. And I was at that game.
Cal as snob school and Fresno State as chip school. Partly accurate. We're academic snobs. Fresno State's more mainstream now that it can and will play P12 and other OOC teams. So the chip is diminishing.
I'm not sure there's any bitterness towards Cal. If anything, its the "chip" to all schools that Fresno wants to "play up" to.
As for congressional districts - poster has it wrong. Fresno metro area and suburbs are in the 21st Cong. District. That's Jim Costa - a Democrat.
As for the rest, I think one thing posters on here are forgetting - well, some posters - is that there is no school in the P12's reach that enhances or brings more value to the brand. So, these rumors about SDSU, or SMU or UNLV - they're right - it likely won't bring more value to the brand than USC or UCLA. But value doesn't seem to be the focus anymore, its a regional imperative now. That is the only reason the B12 is looking at Fresno State.
So, if by some miracle the B12 takes Fresno State - what then? We just let the B12 cross a bridge into California. We have to start thinking that if we hear about one move, there's 3-4 moves behind the one we know about.
I get what everyone is saying about Fresno State. There's no upside. But, is there any upside where we are right now?
I said it wouldn't sell out at Cal and hasn't sold well in the past. Cal's interest in conference partners isn't how well Cal can help sell out their stadium, but how well they can help sell out Cal's stadium. That should be self-explanatory.
And in 1995, Fresno State played at Cal, not the other way around. And the attendance was 35,500. That is far from a sell out. Not sure what game you were at in 1995, but if it was in Fresno, it wasn't the Cal game.
And, according to the US Congress website, the Fresno State campus is in Kevin McCarthy's district, but, fair, the stadium is the only part of campus not in his district. Which is actually quite comical.
I also made no statement on Fresno State's value as a Pac-12 team. I just pointed out the ridiculous claim that playing Fresno State would increase fan interest in Berkeley. We've played Fresno Sate in Berkeley and it did no such thing.
Oh man. Well, yeah its in his district. But he wins because the bulk of his district resides in foothills and in Bakersfield. That's what he reps. Bakersfield, not Fresno.
And the OP made no claim that it would increase fan interest in Berkeley. He said Cal and Stanford would sell out in Fresno.
I also made no statement that Fresno State added value. But while we're at it - they don't. What I did say is that the B12 isn't looking for value in the sense we are all talking about it - which is media value. Its looking at Fresno state as a regional in-road to California.
I wasn't speaking hesitantly like I was unsure whether Fresno State would sell out games against Cal. I was being intentionally flippant when I used the word "might" because no one in the Pac-12 cares how we'd help Fresno State sell out their games. It's immaterial.
It makes zero sense to mention that as a reason to add Fresno State to the conference. And your statement that the original poster made no claim that Fresno would increase fan interest in Berkeley is categorically false. Read his earlier post.Quote:
Cal playing Stanford, SJSU, Fresno, Nevada and Hawaii every year (your place or mine) would do a lot to making Cal football more popular locally. Higher attendance, more regional viewership and following.
It's right there dude. The post is about how adding Fresno State would boost Cal.
I can't tell the difference between your flippancy and seriousness. And no sh*t no one would care about Fresno State. This isn't about value. Get that through your head. There is no value to be added to the P12 by adding SDSU, Boise, SMU or Fresno State.
But just for kicks and giggles - since Fresno State travels quite well - we could probably get close to 40k into our stadium for a game like that. I mean - we rank 9th in the P12 in average attendance at around 38k for 2022. Fresno's good for about 2-5k traveling fans. Just sayin.
I got that from the post on 3/8 at 2:19 pm. It's literally two posts above the one I replied to. It's really not that hard to find.
Get this through your head. "Cal and Stanford will sell out every Fresno home game" is saying that Cal and Stanford will sell out their home games against Fresno. Not the other way around. Because that's what those words mean.
And it you don't understand that, use context clues. First, the preceding statement says it's a reason the Pac-12 should add Fresno. Helping Fresno sell out their games is not a reason the Pac-12 would add them. Fresno helping Cal and Stanford sell tickets would be a reason the Pac-12 should add them. If it were true. And if you just look up two posts, you will see he is CLEARLY talking about Fresno helping Cal sell out Cal games.
And get this through your head. I am not talking about whether any team would add value to the Pac-12. I am ONLY talking about whether more Cal fans will show up to watch Fresno than Cal. You continue to interject talking points that have no bearing on anything I've said. Stop it.
You're arguing over words you've misread and you continue to argue even after it's been proven that you misread them.
philly1121 said:
Dude you're so sped. Your entire implication is that Fresno State is a crap team from a crap region that shouldn't even be near Cal. Get THIS through your head - we are not the center of the universe. No one cares about us except our own myopic alumni who think we are one win away from lasting greatness.
I'm so tired of your double talk. Believe whatever you want dude. Peace
Please quote where I said that. All I said is that Fresno State will not help Cal sell out Cal's home. At no point did I ever say Fresno was a crap team. I think Fresno State could beat Cal quite often. At no point did I suggest Cal was some almighty program. I think Cal could wind up in the MWC. You are arguing with an imaginary person in your own head and not something I've said. You misread the post and when your mistake was pointed out, you continue to argue.
That Cal will not sell out home games against Fresno State is about Cal fans' disinterest; it is not about the quality of Fresno's program. ASU doesn't help Cal sell out either. Nor does Arizona. Or Colorado. Stop reading into things that aren't there.
Utah AD reacts to rumors
Give me a break https://t.co/R3FM73ud1k
— Mark Harlan (@MarkHarlan_AD) March 10, 2023
Fresno is a good add in every way but the ones that helps the Pac stay together and get a good TV deal.
Bobodeluxe said:
Well. We will see. I expect Mountain West. Many don't.
Only in my most pessimistic moments and only because Christ/Knowlton are still in charge.
I think, even with the above, a far more likely "worst case" is a PAC-10 that absorbs more and more MWC schools, because the PAC-10 is always going to be the stronger brand.
Great brand.
movielover said:
Great brand.
I didn't say "great" I said "better." As in "better than the Mountain West."
For reference, the MWC's current media deal is $3.9 million per school per year.
There is no school in the MWC that would not jump at the chance to join an even watered down PAC-12.
Probably the best, most concise post yet on this topic. I really don't think people hate Fresno for no reason. I appreciate the fan loyalty and civic pride. Having grown up in El Paso which is the red-headed stepchild of Texas I completely understand the frustration. That being said, I don't think adding Fresno St will accomplish what most of us aspire to which somehow keeping Cal relevant on the national level. Maybe that's a quixotic endeavor for athletics, but it's very difficult for me and many others to accept that we can't be successful on the football field and basketball court when we're world class in the classrooms and labs.wc22 said:
Fresno is a good add in every way but the ones that helps the Pac stay together and get a good TV deal.
I might eat my words (cheap Amazon might open their wallet), but here's what I believe:
- we are past Peak Cable. The Big10 contract was the Highwater mark. It is prob way over valued. And just like having a 3% assumable mortgage, the Big 10 is using this financial instrument to gut the P12 and it's working. But the market has changed for everyone else.
- just like there is the AFC and NFC for the NFL; there is only room at the top for two at most. The rest would be "G5".
- far flung conferences lead to fan apathy. Naturally the west is more spread out compared to the East. But Cal was doing itself no favors by not scheduling SJSU and Fresno St at War Memorial since 1995 because of perceived elitism. Dumb business moves in my opinion.
- when faced with this situation, the smartest move is to 1) try to get into the "NFL", 2) acknowledge the situation and "retreat to the core." The core being California, the most populous, wealthy, state in the US. If you're not cracking the top, your next aim is best of the rest. In the junior college football ranks, the California JC champion can also claim they are "national champions." At the end of this craziness, regionalization will emerge the next most rational move. But at least that region is California, which would span about half the Eastern seaboard.
- the whole notion of conference media money and equal sharing is in the past. More of a meritocracy will emerge. There will be a Universal Basic Income but to the best performers go the spoils. Maybe the base money is too good in the Big10 / SEC, so it's ok, but all the rest will have that. So expect say BYU to keep their side deal. Nothing stopping Hawaii from distributing their 9pm PST kickoff games on PPV stream to Amazon or Apple+ (except their own lack of prioritizing) - it's really there for the taking to 5,000x their distribution. I think the tier 1, 2, 3 media limitations might have to be renegotiated - and prob are in the P12 (UW wants unequal share).
- football is a brutal sport, being played more and more disproportionately by lower income kids. To dress it up with all the posh and elitism of academic superiority is an Emperor wears no clothes moment. At the end of the day, it is brutal and fought between one man vs the other. The part about academics is lost to me.
There is a chance that the Big 10 has a 6 team pod on the west coast. But other than that, G5. Big 12 is still G5 even with the Corner Schools.
We will see.
- we are past Peak Cable. The Big10 contract was the Highwater mark. It is prob way over valued. And just like having a 3% assumable mortgage, the Big 10 is using this financial instrument to gut the P12 and it's working. But the market has changed for everyone else.
- just like there is the AFC and NFC for the NFL; there is only room at the top for two at most. The rest would be "G5".
- far flung conferences lead to fan apathy. Naturally the west is more spread out compared to the East. But Cal was doing itself no favors by not scheduling SJSU and Fresno St at War Memorial since 1995 because of perceived elitism. Dumb business moves in my opinion.
- when faced with this situation, the smartest move is to 1) try to get into the "NFL", 2) acknowledge the situation and "retreat to the core." The core being California, the most populous, wealthy, state in the US. If you're not cracking the top, your next aim is best of the rest. In the junior college football ranks, the California JC champion can also claim they are "national champions." At the end of this craziness, regionalization will emerge the next most rational move. But at least that region is California, which would span about half the Eastern seaboard.
- the whole notion of conference media money and equal sharing is in the past. More of a meritocracy will emerge. There will be a Universal Basic Income but to the best performers go the spoils. Maybe the base money is too good in the Big10 / SEC, so it's ok, but all the rest will have that. So expect say BYU to keep their side deal. Nothing stopping Hawaii from distributing their 9pm PST kickoff games on PPV stream to Amazon or Apple+ (except their own lack of prioritizing) - it's really there for the taking to 5,000x their distribution. I think the tier 1, 2, 3 media limitations might have to be renegotiated - and prob are in the P12 (UW wants unequal share).
- football is a brutal sport, being played more and more disproportionately by lower income kids. To dress it up with all the posh and elitism of academic superiority is an Emperor wears no clothes moment. At the end of the day, it is brutal and fought between one man vs the other. The part about academics is lost to me.
There is a chance that the Big 10 has a 6 team pod on the west coast. But other than that, G5. Big 12 is still G5 even with the Corner Schools.
We will see.
JMO but I see the B1G as the destination. That is where UW and UO along with Cal and Stanford want to end up. The Big 12 is a soft landing spot for ASU, UA, Utah and Colorado. Those 4 schools as of today are not likely to be pursued by the B1G. Cal and Stanford may not be in that equation either today. But need a home conference and hope for further realignment down the road.Hawaii Haas said:
I might eat my words (cheap Amazon might open their wallet), but here's what I believe:
- we are past Peak Cable. The Big10 contract was the Highwater mark. It is prob way over valued. And just like having a 3% assumable mortgage, the Big 10 is using this financial instrument to gut the P12 and it's working. But the market has changed for everyone else.
- just like there is the AFC and NFC for the NFL; there is only room at the top for two at most. The rest would be "G5".
- far flung conferences lead to fan apathy. Naturally the west is more spread out compared to the East. But Cal was doing itself no favors by not scheduling SJSU and Fresno St at War Memorial since 1995 because of perceived elitism. Dumb business moves in my opinion.
- when faced with this situation, the smartest move is to 1) try to get into the "NFL", 2) acknowledge the situation and "retreat to the core." The core being California, the most populous, wealthy, state in the US. If you're not cracking the top, your next aim is best of the rest. In the junior college football ranks, the California JC champion can also claim they are "national champions." At the end of this craziness, regionalization will emerge the next most rational move. But at least that region is California, which would span about half the Eastern seaboard.
- the whole notion of conference media money and equal sharing is in the past. More of a meritocracy will emerge. There will be a Universal Basic Income but to the best performers go the spoils. Maybe the base money is too good in the Big10 / SEC, so it's ok, but all the rest will have that. So expect say BYU to keep their side deal. Nothing stopping Hawaii from distributing their 9pm PST kickoff games on PPV stream to Amazon or Apple+ (except their own lack of prioritizing) - it's really there for the taking to 5,000x their distribution. I think the tier 1, 2, 3 media limitations might have to be renegotiated - and prob are in the P12 (UW wants unequal share).
- football is a brutal sport, being played more and more disproportionately by lower income kids. To dress it up with all the posh and elitism of academic superiority is an Emperor wears no clothes moment. At the end of the day, it is brutal and fought between one man vs the other. The part about academics is lost to me.
There is a chance that the Big 10 has a 6 team pod on the west coast. But other than that, G5. Big 12 is still G5 even with the Corner Schools.
We will see.
Fresno St., SJSU and others in the current MWC (G5) add nothing to the P12. The P12 is in limbo. Some members want to be invited to the B1G. They will stay only if they have to. For now anyway.
So I agree in some measure that outside of the B1G and SEC the other conferences take on lesser value. The remaining P5 conferences (P12, Big 12 and ACC) sit in that uncomfortable place between the rich and the poor. Some will rise and some will fall. If you can get to the B1G now you must. Working towards that end is crucial. There may have to be some "bridge" deal to hold the P12 together til the next expansion.
The academic argument is a bit hard to comprehend, but school presidents still want to tout those things. If even for window dressing. I agree some meritocracy is likely to emerge. Even now there is talk about unequal sharing for the P12. Not sure how real that talk is. But the ACC has some programs (FSU, Clemson, UNC, Miami) that want that discussion now. The Big 12 has no programs anymore that either the SEC or B1G want. UT and Oklahoma have left already. They were the USC and UCLA of the Big 12.
There are discussions even now about a Super Conference outside NCAA jurisdiction. A coalition of football programs that have their own rules and a seperate made for TV CFP. That CFP likely goes to 16 and would exclude G5 teams. It expands to 12 soon but 16 I believe is the ultimate number. This coalition of teams could effectively forever make G5 football like FCS football. No longer would you play against G5 teams even in OOC. The new coalition would keep all the TV money and could possibly include NCAA basketball as well. It is not a coincidence that programs like Gonzaga are looking to make a jump. We have seen reports that the Big 12 is looking at some Big East programs like Villanova and UConn as the future lies in consolidation not in having over 130 D1 football teams and over 300 D1 hoops teams. We love the Cinderella stories in the hoops tourney but the big boy programs do not want to share to wealth.
This is why IMO the P12 is having such a hard time finding a TV deal. Different schools have different end games. Not every school will end up in the B1G. Can UW and UO get there now? IMO that is the real holdup. if they can they likely will. Does Cal and Stanford have a shot at a B1G invite now? Who knows. If the B1G is truly done for now the P12 likely finds a deal. if they are not done I think the P12 is really on shaky ground.
I agree there is a bigger seperation coming. Maybe a few years off yet, but coming. These schools see it and are now looking out for themselves. If they can find a deal that keeps them together while looking forward to the next alignment that is great. If the B1G wants or will take UO and UW now all bets are off IMO.
The B1G is the destination. That is where the rich will live. That is the safe gated community that is insulated from all the other stuff. The G5 will be the poor. The 3 other P5 conferences will be the middle class. Who from that group can gain entry into the country club of the current P2 is what really matters in the end.
You keep saying the same things about Fresno. You continue to be wrong.
Fresno may add 4K more people in the seats. That is irrelevant.
Fresno offers no additive tv market therefore they are a non-starter. Full. Stop.
Fresno may be better than SMU. SMU may be a bad add. But SMU offers the possibility of building a brand in a big market which happens to exist in a different time zone. When you (the P12 conference) are in dire straights you have to consider making speculative plays like this. To a certain extent, see Utah and ASU.
The sweet spot is to get the conference big enough that it covers desirable tv markets in different time zones to make TV happy AND have divisions which promote geographic rivalries to make fans happy. Geographic rivalries are what makes the college football I (and likely you) grew up loving so great. But those days - in their old structure - are dead. It is all about TV markets and brands.
I believe you are slightly off on your prediction about the future of college football being 2 conferences. It will be some contrived entity (think NCAA) that covers all tv markets and has about 50-60 teams. The end game here is for the Big Boys to leave the NCAA, develop their own rules, develop their own / new governing model and to operate separately so they can keep all the real money to themselves. That isn't really viable with just 2 conferences. They need more geographic coverage to make tv work and they need more diversity to have lasting appeal within the marketplace. As is evidenced by the recent expansion of the CFP, people will only watch the same B10 and SEC teams so many times before it becomes boring. To put it simply - the Yankees of the world need the KC Royals of the world.
Given this likely future for college football the end game is To Be Among The Haves - the @60 teams that self govern. The ACC has too many valuable brands not to be a part of it in some fashion. So that means it is us vs. B12. We should win that battle hands down, but we could certainly lose it by doing stupid things like adding Fresno State and focusing on home games against SJS.
Given the above, my opinion is that a smart and forward thinking - but risky - approach would be to do something like this:
- Add 4 teams now (something like SDSU, SMU, RICE and maybe UNVL...markets and time zones). The conference Presidents have to get over themselves on academics here.
- Create 2 Divisions. Pacific (UW, WSU, UO, OSU, Cal, Furd, SDSU) and "Mountain/Desert/Texas" (CU, Utah, ASU, UA, SMU, RICE, UNLV)
- Merge with the ACC, which also splits into 2 divisions. For football purposes teams play 6 Division games against their own, 1 game each against the other divisions and 3 non-Con games. There could be tv reasons for doing 0 non-con games and instead playing 2 games each against the other divisions so that all tv content is conference product. Someone else suggested calling it the PACC (Pacific Atlantic Coastal Conference), which I like so I will borrow it here.
PACC, SEC, B10 and ND = 57 teams. That's in the range of that magic number for the future self governing entity. In this potential future world we crush the B12. They lose and are left no option other than to join the Mt West and AAC as the 2nd tier entity of college football...the future version of our current FCS division.
Something like that is the proper path forward, not adding Fresno State and becoming part of some ****ty glorified Mt. West Conference that pays each team 5m a year (in exchange for 4k extra fans...which equates to about 250K) and results in the Athletic Department shutting down all operations.
Fresno may add 4K more people in the seats. That is irrelevant.
Fresno offers no additive tv market therefore they are a non-starter. Full. Stop.
Fresno may be better than SMU. SMU may be a bad add. But SMU offers the possibility of building a brand in a big market which happens to exist in a different time zone. When you (the P12 conference) are in dire straights you have to consider making speculative plays like this. To a certain extent, see Utah and ASU.
The sweet spot is to get the conference big enough that it covers desirable tv markets in different time zones to make TV happy AND have divisions which promote geographic rivalries to make fans happy. Geographic rivalries are what makes the college football I (and likely you) grew up loving so great. But those days - in their old structure - are dead. It is all about TV markets and brands.
I believe you are slightly off on your prediction about the future of college football being 2 conferences. It will be some contrived entity (think NCAA) that covers all tv markets and has about 50-60 teams. The end game here is for the Big Boys to leave the NCAA, develop their own rules, develop their own / new governing model and to operate separately so they can keep all the real money to themselves. That isn't really viable with just 2 conferences. They need more geographic coverage to make tv work and they need more diversity to have lasting appeal within the marketplace. As is evidenced by the recent expansion of the CFP, people will only watch the same B10 and SEC teams so many times before it becomes boring. To put it simply - the Yankees of the world need the KC Royals of the world.
Given this likely future for college football the end game is To Be Among The Haves - the @60 teams that self govern. The ACC has too many valuable brands not to be a part of it in some fashion. So that means it is us vs. B12. We should win that battle hands down, but we could certainly lose it by doing stupid things like adding Fresno State and focusing on home games against SJS.
Given the above, my opinion is that a smart and forward thinking - but risky - approach would be to do something like this:
- Add 4 teams now (something like SDSU, SMU, RICE and maybe UNVL...markets and time zones). The conference Presidents have to get over themselves on academics here.
- Create 2 Divisions. Pacific (UW, WSU, UO, OSU, Cal, Furd, SDSU) and "Mountain/Desert/Texas" (CU, Utah, ASU, UA, SMU, RICE, UNLV)
- Merge with the ACC, which also splits into 2 divisions. For football purposes teams play 6 Division games against their own, 1 game each against the other divisions and 3 non-Con games. There could be tv reasons for doing 0 non-con games and instead playing 2 games each against the other divisions so that all tv content is conference product. Someone else suggested calling it the PACC (Pacific Atlantic Coastal Conference), which I like so I will borrow it here.
PACC, SEC, B10 and ND = 57 teams. That's in the range of that magic number for the future self governing entity. In this potential future world we crush the B12. They lose and are left no option other than to join the Mt West and AAC as the 2nd tier entity of college football...the future version of our current FCS division.
Something like that is the proper path forward, not adding Fresno State and becoming part of some ****ty glorified Mt. West Conference that pays each team 5m a year (in exchange for 4k extra fans...which equates to about 250K) and results in the Athletic Department shutting down all operations.
The B1G is going to scoop up UNC and Virginia if the ACC doesn't stabilize in the next decade. Then they will have a nationwide conference with all the top academic public schools. Cal's only path forward is to join that group or basically give up on athletics. Alumni are not going to support a glorified MWC football team playing Fresno State, Nevada, Oregon State, and Washington State. That would be the absolute end, no question about it.
Alumni don't support the team now.CaliforniaEternal said:
The B1G is going to scoop up UNC and Virginia if the ACC doesn't stabilize in the next decade. Then they will have a nationwide conference with all the top academic public schools. Cal's only path forward is to join that group or basically give up on athletics. Alumni are not going to support a glorified MWC football team playing Fresno State, Nevada, Oregon State, and Washington State. That would be the absolute end, no question about it.
CaliforniaEternal said:
The B1G is going to scoop up UNC and Virginia if the ACC doesn't stabilize in the next decade. Then they will have a nationwide conference with all the top academic public schools. Cal's only path forward is to join that group or basically give up on athletics. Alumni are not going to support a glorified MWC football team playing Fresno State, Nevada, Oregon State, and Washington State. That would be the absolute end, no question about it.
Spot on. Academics and Athletic branding are tied. We join the 90+% acceptance rate conference and you can kiss our brand goodbye. Better to close shop and focus exclusively on improving our academic reputation where it belongs - waaay above UCLA.
My fear is that our leadership has no clout, no connections, and no vision for how we ensure we get a seat in the power conference.
I am focused on enjoying the 2023 football season because after this it will be a fast decline.
The one thing I still have a hard time believing is that the bay area can be completely excluded from a super conference. You have two great academic institutions in a big media market where a ton of B1G alums love and would want to visit. Seems like a big opportunity to miss especially if you pressure cal and Stanford to up their game.
Featured Stories
See All
Bears Add Portal Edge Defender Deamontae Diggs
by Jim McGill
NFL Draft results and their relation to Collegiate success
by Bear Insider