ColoradoBear said:

---

He also says the pro rata share for new teams in the Big 12 tv contract is $20 million per school. That is far to low to even get consideration from the 4 corner schools. So in a way he's right - if the p12 cannot crack $20 million per school, there is going to be a push to break up. But that seems very very low.

If Kliavkoff is pushing for (and promising members) $35-40 million per school, but only can get $20 million in the end, he's far worse than Scott. Dodd doesn't seem to actually have any info on the p12 situation, just a doomsday scenario.

---

southseasbear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

Cool. Play Davis, Stanford, Oregon State, Washington State, whoever else wants in who doesn't get scooped up by the NIL leagues. Kids can prove themselves, and get paid to leave if they want. Stream all games, played in the afternoon, when the Flying Spaghetti Monster intended, with no commercial interruptions. Two and a half hour games.

I would buy tickets again.

---

Tickets should be cheaper and other sports will be cut due to the loss of TV revenue.

---

Econ141 said:

---

If PAC is dissolved

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/will-the-pac-12-break-up-where-each-team-would-go-if-league-disintegrates-over-media-rights-deal/

Hard to imagine the 6th largest media market being left out but hey, we have only ourselves to blame.

---

Econ141 said:

---

If PAC is dissolved

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/will-the-pac-12-break-up-where-each-team-would-go-if-league-disintegrates-over-media-rights-deal/

Hard to imagine the 6th largest media market being left out but hey, we have only ourselves to blame.

---

LunchTime said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

If PAC is dissolved

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/will-the-pac-12-break-up-where-each-team-would-go-if-league-disintegrates-over-media-rights-deal/

Hard to imagine the 6th largest media market being left out but hey, we have only ourselves to blame.

---

How does Cal and Furd do in their own market? Seriously, how much of the market do you get with those two?

---

Econ141 said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

If PAC is dissolved

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/will-the-pac-12-break-up-where-each-team-would-go-if-league-disintegrates-over-media-rights-deal/

Hard to imagine the 6th largest media market being left out but hey, we have only ourselves to blame.

---

How does Cal and Furd do in their own market? Seriously, how much of the market do you get with those two?

---

I must admit that I have no idea how all this TV market nonsense works. That said, what does Rutgers give you of the NY market? What does Illinois, Maryland give you? I'd put our program up against those any day in terms of number fans, program history, and academic brand ... and that is saying something because I am very short Cal right now. All I'm saying is that there are a ton of crap schools in the B1G, Cal can take its rightful place amongst those.

From a reputation stand point, we should give up football before being mentioned in the same breath as Fresno st, UNLV, boise st or whatever other g5 conferences are out there that Carol and Knowlton think we are more suited for. That would damage our academic reputation.

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

nwbear84 said:

---

CALiforniALUM said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

If PAC is dissolved

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/will-the-pac-12-break-up-where-each-team-would-go-if-league-disintegrates-over-media-rights-deal/

Hard to imagine the 6th largest media market being left out but hey, we have only ourselves to blame.

---

We place a lot of blame on the commissioner, the coach, the AD, and the chancellor for our problems, but when should we blame the fans?

If we had a rabid fanbase that demanded accountability none of this would even be a problem. The problem is that we don't have what it takes as a fanbase. Apathy has been part of Cal athletics since I graduated, and apparently with the exception for the few years I was on campus has also been the status quo since before my time back to the Pappy Waldorf's days.

I'm not holding my breath for anything to change with Cal Athletics. I've written too many letters to people who never respond. I don't give enough to warrant anything other than a cut and paste email response. I don't live close enough to Berkeley to spend on the product.

I think a streaming service will just point out what is obvious to the media companies is that we think we are worth more than we really are. You can't claim your wealthy alumni base as a valuable asset if nobody tunes in. Furd is even worse.

---

I think you have a point. I recall going to a game in 2009, I'm pretty sure, with several alum friends. We all graduated in the mid 80s. They all went to games as students, but I got the impression they didn't go to games much anymore. They lived in the Bay area and I lived out of state. I happened to mention something specific about a player or two before the game and they all looked at me funny and said "you don't follow Cal football do you?", like I was some sort of oddball. I suspect they reflect the majority of Cal alumni.

---

If I see someone wearing Cal gear here in SoCal I will sometimes (not always) shout a "Go Bears!" and usually will get a good response. However, that's if the person is wearing a Cal hat or sweatshirt and so sort of self-identifying as a sports fan.

When I was maybe 4-5 years out of college I took a job at a place that had a lot of grads from around the country (around the world, actually). People took pride in their school, especially during college football bowl season or March Madness. Of course the people from Texas, USC, and Michigan were vocal fans, but even alumni of schools like NC State, Purdue, Colorado, and Northwestern tended to show school pride.

I found out this one senior guy I was working with was a Cal grad. I had no idea, but he mentioned something about "when I was at Berkeley..." which is how I found out. BTW, "the guys at Berkeley" is a common phrase and is usually followed by something to be really proud of but not related to athletics as in "the guys at Berkeley came up with a way to..."

Anyway, so this guy was about 30 years older than me, but I thought we had some kinship having both gone to Berkeley so the next time I e-mailed him about something work-related I closed by stating that I had gone to Berkeley, too, and it was nice to meet a fellow Bear. I signed off with "Go Bears!"

What I received back was the rudest, most ugly response you can imagine. This guy said that he spent most of his time at Berkeley studying and never really got into athletics or sports or anything like that. I can't really remember what he said, but it was a big put down and just really upset me at the time because there weren't that many Berkeley alums working there and I thought we had something in common. I never mentioned it again and I was glad when he switched departments. Some alumni network, huh?

Now, I don't want one jackass to define all Cal alumni, but I have to say that this attitude is a lot closer to how most Berkeley alumni feel about sports based on my experience in a technical field and as a student. There is a sort of snobbery that Stanford alumni also have as well as most Ivy League and similar schools like Caltech/MIT/Johns Hopkins, etc which don't participate in big time college sports which is that the students are either too busy doing great things to bother with sports or else they find that sort of a "normie" thing to be interested in and would rather play paintball or engage in cosplay or something rather than drink beer and tailgate at a football game.

By the way, I have to say that one of my best friends in high school hated sports. Hated it to watch them. Hated to play them. He and his circle of friends would go up into the mountains to a cabin with no TV on Super Bowl weekend to play roleplaying games without fail. After undergrad at Mudd he went to USC for grad school for two degrees and while there he actually went to a football game, because he wanted to spend time with his dad. I almost choked on my lunch when I heard that. I think that it was the height of the Pete Carroll era probably helped. So I think that there is some truth that having a winning team does matter, but unless Cal returns to its glory years I don't think that's something to count on.

---

Sorry to hear of your experience.

I usually have a different experience. But if I hear that someone went to "Berkeley" I begin by asking when they graduated. Were they undergraduates there and or grad students. What areas/majors did they study. What activities they participated in. Eventually I get to did they attend any sporting activities.

I normally will not give a "Go Bears" shout out or sign off unless I know they attended Cap athletic games or unless they wear "Cal" identifying paraphernalia

Even during the heights of Tedford's success there were many Berkeley students who did not attend Cal athletic events.

I remember one year I was walking past Doe Library after a jam packed Big Game (a victory). Tons of people wearing blue and gold on campus

I was stopped by a student who was exiting the library. He saw I was wearing my Cal gear.
He asked what was going on. Why were so many people wearing blue and gold. He thought there might be something going on at the Greek Theater

There are lots of students at Cal who are proud of their Berkeley education. But could not care less about Cal athletics.

So I try to connect with them as fellow Berkeley grads.

---

dimitrig said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

nwbear84 said:

---

CALiforniALUM said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

If PAC is dissolved

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/will-the-pac-12-break-up-where-each-team-would-go-if-league-disintegrates-over-media-rights-deal/

Hard to imagine the 6th largest media market being left out but hey, we have only ourselves to blame.

---

We place a lot of blame on the commissioner, the coach, the AD, and the chancellor for our problems, but when should we blame the fans?

If we had a rabid fanbase that demanded accountability none of this would even be a problem. The problem is that we don't have what it takes as a fanbase. Apathy has been part of Cal athletics since I graduated, and apparently with the exception for the few years I was on campus has also been the status quo since before my time back to the Pappy Waldorf's days.

I'm not holding my breath for anything to change with Cal Athletics. I've written too many letters to people who never respond. I don't give enough to warrant anything other than a cut and paste email response. I don't live close enough to Berkeley to spend on the product.

I think a streaming service will just point out what is obvious to the media companies is that we think we are worth more than we really are. You can't claim your wealthy alumni base as a valuable asset if nobody tunes in. Furd is even worse.

---

I think you have a point. I recall going to a game in 2009, I'm pretty sure, with several alum friends. We all graduated in the mid 80s. They all went to games as students, but I got the impression they didn't go to games much anymore. They lived in the Bay area and I lived out of state. I happened to mention something specific about a player or two before the game and they all looked at me funny and said "you don't follow Cal football do you?", like I was some sort of oddball. I suspect they reflect the majority of Cal alumni.

---

If I see someone wearing Cal gear here in SoCal I will sometimes (not always) shout a "Go Bears!" and usually will get a good response. However, that's if the person is wearing a Cal hat or sweatshirt and so sort of self-identifying as a sports fan.

When I was maybe 4-5 years out of college I took a job at a place that had a lot of grads from around the country (around the world, actually). People took pride in their school, especially during college football bowl season or March Madness. Of course the people from Texas, USC, and Michigan were vocal fans, but even alumni of schools like NC State, Purdue, Colorado, and Northwestern tended to show school pride.

I found out this one senior guy I was working with was a Cal grad. I had no idea, but he mentioned something about "when I was at Berkeley..." which is how I found out. BTW, "the guys at Berkeley" is a common phrase and is usually followed by something to be really proud of but not related to athletics as in "the guys at Berkeley came up with a way to..."

Anyway, so this guy was about 30 years older than me, but I thought we had some kinship having both gone to Berkeley so the next time I e-mailed him about something work-related I closed by stating that I had gone to Berkeley, too, and it was nice to meet a fellow Bear. I signed off with "Go Bears!"

What I received back was the rudest, most ugly response you can imagine. This guy said that he spent most of his time at Berkeley studying and never really got into athletics or sports or anything like that. I can't really remember what he said, but it was a big put down and just really upset me at the time because there weren't that many Berkeley alums working there and I thought we had something in common. I never mentioned it again and I was glad when he switched departments. Some alumni network, huh?

Now, I don't want one jackass to define all Cal alumni, but I have to say that this attitude is a lot closer to how most Berkeley alumni feel about sports based on my experience in a technical field and as a student. There is a sort of snobbery that Stanford alumni also have as well as most Ivy League and similar schools like Caltech/MIT/Johns Hopkins, etc which don't participate in big time college sports which is that the students are either too busy doing great things to bother with sports or else they find that sort of a "normie" thing to be interested in and would rather play paintball or engage in cosplay or something rather than drink beer and tailgate at a football game.

By the way, I have to say that one of my best friends in high school hated sports. Hated it to watch them. Hated to play them. He and his circle of friends would go up into the mountains to a cabin with no TV on Super Bowl weekend to play roleplaying games without fail. After undergrad at Mudd he went to USC for grad school for two degrees and while there he actually went to a football game, because he wanted to spend time with his dad. I almost choked on my lunch when I heard that. I think that it was the height of the Pete Carroll era probably helped. So I think that there is some truth that having a winning team does matter, but unless Cal returns to its glory years I don't think that's something to count on.

---

Sorry to hear of your experience.

I usually have a different experience. But if I hear that someone went to "Berkeley" I begin by asking when they graduated. Were they undergraduates there and or grad students. What areas/majors did they study. What activities they participated in. Eventually I get to did they attend any sporting activities.

I normally will not give a "Go Bears" shout out or sign off unless I know they attended Cap athletic games or unless they wear "Cal" identifying paraphernalia

Even during the heights of Tedford's success there were many Berkeley students who did not attend Cal athletic events.

I remember one year I was walking past Doe Library after a jam packed Big Game (a victory). Tons of people wearing blue and gold on campus

I was stopped by a student who was exiting the library. He saw I was wearing my Cal gear.
He asked what was going on. Why were so many people wearing blue and gold. He thought there might be something going on at the Greek Theater

There are lots of students at Cal who are proud of their Berkeley education. But could not care less about Cal athletics.

So I try to connect with them as fellow Berkeley grads.

---

Understood.

I think that unlike some other schools there are two things working against us:

1. Our student body prides itself on being counterculture. Lost of students choose Berkeley for that reason. In that way we self-select against students that like big-time organized college athletics.

2. Our student body and administration can be actively hostile towards athletics. I have noticed that even though alums of schools like Michigan and Texas may not care about sports it is usually just apathy. At Berkeley there is an actual undercurrent of hostility, possibly because of #1 above.

I work with a Korean guy who got his PhD at Michigan. He could care less about sports, but he still wears a lanyard that says "Go Blue" on it and if Michigan is in a bowl he probably won't watch the game but he pays enough attention to know if they won or lost it. I think he's more engaged in athletics than many Berkeley alums are because it's just the culture of the school. I work with a lot of Texas alumni who could care less about sports, but they don't HATE them. They just shrug and say "It wouldn't be Texas without football and BBQ."

Anyway... my $0.02.

---

• As you say, UM football was/is an overwhelming part of the culture there. There was nothing to be gained by actively opposing it.
• Michigan and in particular, Detroit was (and largely still is) in the economic dumps and UM was trying to attract out-of-state student $$, and if football was a lure, that was OK by the faculty and administration.
• UM had THREE large indoor athletic facilities for students - each comparable to RSF (which was still several years in the future). I was told that much of the revenue from football/basketball was used to build/renovate these facilities. So, as a student, even if you didn't care for revenue sports, you still could benefit from them.

HearstMining said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

nwbear84 said:

---

CALiforniALUM said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

If PAC is dissolved

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/will-the-pac-12-break-up-where-each-team-would-go-if-league-disintegrates-over-media-rights-deal/

Hard to imagine the 6th largest media market being left out but hey, we have only ourselves to blame.

---

We place a lot of blame on the commissioner, the coach, the AD, and the chancellor for our problems, but when should we blame the fans?

If we had a rabid fanbase that demanded accountability none of this would even be a problem. The problem is that we don't have what it takes as a fanbase. Apathy has been part of Cal athletics since I graduated, and apparently with the exception for the few years I was on campus has also been the status quo since before my time back to the Pappy Waldorf's days.

I'm not holding my breath for anything to change with Cal Athletics. I've written too many letters to people who never respond. I don't give enough to warrant anything other than a cut and paste email response. I don't live close enough to Berkeley to spend on the product.

I think a streaming service will just point out what is obvious to the media companies is that we think we are worth more than we really are. You can't claim your wealthy alumni base as a valuable asset if nobody tunes in. Furd is even worse.

---

I think you have a point. I recall going to a game in 2009, I'm pretty sure, with several alum friends. We all graduated in the mid 80s. They all went to games as students, but I got the impression they didn't go to games much anymore. They lived in the Bay area and I lived out of state. I happened to mention something specific about a player or two before the game and they all looked at me funny and said "you don't follow Cal football do you?", like I was some sort of oddball. I suspect they reflect the majority of Cal alumni.

---

If I see someone wearing Cal gear here in SoCal I will sometimes (not always) shout a "Go Bears!" and usually will get a good response. However, that's if the person is wearing a Cal hat or sweatshirt and so sort of self-identifying as a sports fan.

When I was maybe 4-5 years out of college I took a job at a place that had a lot of grads from around the country (around the world, actually). People took pride in their school, especially during college football bowl season or March Madness. Of course the people from Texas, USC, and Michigan were vocal fans, but even alumni of schools like NC State, Purdue, Colorado, and Northwestern tended to show school pride.

I found out this one senior guy I was working with was a Cal grad. I had no idea, but he mentioned something about "when I was at Berkeley..." which is how I found out. BTW, "the guys at Berkeley" is a common phrase and is usually followed by something to be really proud of but not related to athletics as in "the guys at Berkeley came up with a way to..."

Anyway, so this guy was about 30 years older than me, but I thought we had some kinship having both gone to Berkeley so the next time I e-mailed him about something work-related I closed by stating that I had gone to Berkeley, too, and it was nice to meet a fellow Bear. I signed off with "Go Bears!"

What I received back was the rudest, most ugly response you can imagine. This guy said that he spent most of his time at Berkeley studying and never really got into athletics or sports or anything like that. I can't really remember what he said, but it was a big put down and just really upset me at the time because there weren't that many Berkeley alums working there and I thought we had something in common. I never mentioned it again and I was glad when he switched departments. Some alumni network, huh?

Now, I don't want one jackass to define all Cal alumni, but I have to say that this attitude is a lot closer to how most Berkeley alumni feel about sports based on my experience in a technical field and as a student. There is a sort of snobbery that Stanford alumni also have as well as most Ivy League and similar schools like Caltech/MIT/Johns Hopkins, etc which don't participate in big time college sports which is that the students are either too busy doing great things to bother with sports or else they find that sort of a "normie" thing to be interested in and would rather play paintball or engage in cosplay or something rather than drink beer and tailgate at a football game.

By the way, I have to say that one of my best friends in high school hated sports. Hated it to watch them. Hated to play them. He and his circle of friends would go up into the mountains to a cabin with no TV on Super Bowl weekend to play roleplaying games without fail. After undergrad at Mudd he went to USC for grad school for two degrees and while there he actually went to a football game, because he wanted to spend time with his dad. I almost choked on my lunch when I heard that. I think that it was the height of the Pete Carroll era probably helped. So I think that there is some truth that having a winning team does matter, but unless Cal returns to its glory years I don't think that's something to count on.

---

Sorry to hear of your experience.

I usually have a different experience. But if I hear that someone went to "Berkeley" I begin by asking when they graduated. Were they undergraduates there and or grad students. What areas/majors did they study. What activities they participated in. Eventually I get to did they attend any sporting activities.

I normally will not give a "Go Bears" shout out or sign off unless I know they attended Cap athletic games or unless they wear "Cal" identifying paraphernalia

Even during the heights of Tedford's success there were many Berkeley students who did not attend Cal athletic events.

I remember one year I was walking past Doe Library after a jam packed Big Game (a victory). Tons of people wearing blue and gold on campus

I was stopped by a student who was exiting the library. He saw I was wearing my Cal gear.
He asked what was going on. Why were so many people wearing blue and gold. He thought there might be something going on at the Greek Theater

There are lots of students at Cal who are proud of their Berkeley education. But could not care less about Cal athletics.

So I try to connect with them as fellow Berkeley grads.

---

Understood.

I think that unlike some other schools there are two things working against us:

1. Our student body prides itself on being counterculture. Lost of students choose Berkeley for that reason. In that way we self-select against students that like big-time organized college athletics.

2. Our student body and administration can be actively hostile towards athletics. I have noticed that even though alums of schools like Michigan and Texas may not care about sports it is usually just apathy. At Berkeley there is an actual undercurrent of hostility, possibly because of #1 above.

I work with a Korean guy who got his PhD at Michigan. He could care less about sports, but he still wears a lanyard that says "Go Blue" on it and if Michigan is in a bowl he probably won't watch the game but he pays enough attention to know if they won or lost it. I think he's more engaged in athletics than many Berkeley alums are because it's just the culture of the school. I work with a lot of Texas alumni who could care less about sports, but they don't HATE them. They just shrug and say "It wouldn't be Texas without football and BBQ."

Anyway... my $0.02.

---

I was at Michigan only from '78-'80, and I think your conclusions are correct. There were students who loved revenue sports and those who ignored them with a shrug but everyone (including faculty) acknowledged it was part of the culture. I remember one prof mentioning with a wry smile that he regularly resold his football tickets through his barber. I think there were several reasons behind this tolerance:

• As you say, UM football was/is an overwhelming part of the culture there. There was nothing to be gained by actively opposing it.
• Michigan and in particular, Detroit was (and largely still is) in the economic dumps and UM was trying to attract out-of-state student $$, and if football was a lure, that was OK by the faculty and administration.
• UM had THREE large indoor athletic facilities for students - each comparable to RSF (which was still several years in the future). I was told that much of the revenue from football/basketball was used to build/renovate these facilities. So, as a student, even if you didn't care for revenue sports, you still could benefit from them.

I worked for a couple of years before UM, so had a more businesslike attitude (probably like your Korean colleague) than I had as an undergrad at Cal, but I will say that a Football Saturday in Ann Arbor was something to see.

---

southseasbear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

PtownBear1 said:

---

**** it, let's just form a conference with Furd. Call it the BANC-2 or Bay Area Nerds Conference. Play each other once a year in football as part of the regular season and a second time for the championship. In basketball, we could play twice during the regular season and a third time for the conference tourney.

Maybe even negotiate to have the football championship at the Rose Bowl (of course during some random time like a Wednesday night in May so it's economical) so we can finally see Cal win the Rose Bowl.

---

You joke, but there may be some merit to the idea. Essentially Cal and Stanford go independent and we schedule Stanford, USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington, Notre Dame, Army and BYU every year. Maybe we get a deal with NBC to be the game after Notre Dame plays. Stream the rest on Apple.

---

Notre Dame is not interested in us. Last year's game was an outlier. Maybe we would have a chance with the others. I would also like to see us regularly host HBCU teams. The game against Grambling was a near sellout (if not a sellout) and had one of the best half time shows I've ever seen.

---

ColoradoBear said:

---

He also says the pro rata share for new teams in the Big 12 tv contract is $20 million per school. That is far to low to even get consideration from the 4 corner schools. So in a way he's right - if the p12 cannot crack $20 million per school, there is going to be a push to break up. But that seems very very low.

If Kliavkoff is pushing for (and promising members) $35-40 million per school, but only can get $20 million in the end, he's far worse than Scott. Dodd doesn't seem to actually have any info on the p12 situation, just a doomsday scenario.

---

southseasbear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

PtownBear1 said:

---

**** it, let's just form a conference with Furd. Call it the BANC-2 or Bay Area Nerds Conference. Play each other once a year in football as part of the regular season and a second time for the championship. In basketball, we could play twice during the regular season and a third time for the conference tourney.

Maybe even negotiate to have the football championship at the Rose Bowl (of course during some random time like a Wednesday night in May so it's economical) so we can finally see Cal win the Rose Bowl.

---

You joke, but there may be some merit to the idea. Essentially Cal and Stanford go independent and we schedule Stanford, USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington, Notre Dame, Army and BYU every year. Maybe we get a deal with NBC to be the game after Notre Dame plays. Stream the rest on Apple.

---

Notre Dame is not interested in us. Last year's game was an outlier. Maybe we would have a chance with the others. I would also like to see us regularly host HBCU teams. The game against Grambling was a near sellout (if not a sellout) and had one of the best half time shows I've ever seen.

---

As an independent, Notre Dame has trouble putting together an annual schedule and always has to play a few rando teams to make it work. You think NBC prefers Notre Dame vs Central Michigan or vs. Tennessee State, to Notre Dame vs California for national broadcasts? Having both Cal and Stanford as independents would be a godsend to Notre Dame for scheduling. Alumni would have an annual game in the Bay Area. Plus, Notre Dame likes to see itself as an academic school, so it would like that association too. NBC would like it too.

---

It is nice to believe that, but Cal has tried for decades to schedule Notre Dame. We eventually succeeded only because we agreed to a one shot deal to play there insead of the more typical home and home series.

---