Since we have not heard a peep from either CAL or Stanford, maybe, just maybe there is something we don't know??? It's odd that Christ, JK, nor Stanford have said anything regarding realignment. Let's all hope the PAC survives without adding schools that are not our peers academically. I, for one, will not be into CAL football if Fresno State, Boise State, UNLV, etc are in our conference. So, here's hoping Christ and JK have done something good for us.

HateRed said:

---

Since we have not heard a peep from either CAL or Stanford, maybe, just maybe there is something we don't know??? It's odd that Christ, JK, nor Stanford have said anything regarding realignment. Let's all hope the PAC survives without adding schools that are not our peers academically. I, for one, will not be into CAL football if Fresno State, Boise State, UNLV, etc are in our conference. So, here's hoping Christ and JK have done something good for us.

---

Oregon and Wash go to the Big 10; Zona, Zona State. and Utah go to the Big 12. Remaining Pac teams (just four--Cal, Stan, Wazzu, and Oregon State) will have no choice but to pluck from the Mountain West Conference or to merge with the Mountain West Conference. This seems to be the evolving consensus among the pundits.

This will be painful for those four remaining Pac schools, financially and otherwise. Cal sadly drops to a lower-level with intercollegiate athletics or elects to exit the space altogether. This would be very sad for Cal sports. The end of an era. Dearly hope it doesn't end this way.

If we get paid just cents on the dollar, I imagine ucla's Calimony would then have to be significant. Here's hoping we can keep them in the B1G cellar out of pure spite and jealousy.

PaulCali said:

---

HateRed said:

---

Since we have not heard a peep from either CAL or Stanford, maybe, just maybe there is something we don't know??? It's odd that Christ, JK, nor Stanford have said anything regarding realignment. Let's all hope the PAC survives without adding schools that are not our peers academically. I, for one, will not be into CAL football if Fresno State, Boise State, UNLV, etc are in our conference. So, here's hoping Christ and JK have done something good for us.

---

Oregon and Wash go to the Big 10; Zona, Zona State. and Utah go to the Big 12. Remaining Pac teams (just four--Cal, Stan, Wazzu, and Oregon State) will have no choice but to pluck from the Mountain West Conference or to merge with the Mountain West Conference. This seems to be the evolving consensus among the pundits.

This will be painful for those four remaining Pac schools, financially and otherwise. Cal sadly drops to a lower-level with intercollegiate athletics or elects to exit the space altogether. This would be very sad for Cal sports. The end of an era. Dearly hope it doesn't end this way.

---

Sorry, Cal Furd OSU and WSU isn't rebuilding the Pac.

The Pac would be dead, and Cal would be in the middle of an ocean of mid majors, begging for a couple million a year.

Then CAL should go independent. I have no interest in CAL being a part of a lower tier conference. If Christ and JK have done nothing to help us get into the BIG if the PAC 12 implodes, then what little philanthropic support I give to Berkeley will stop. The athletic part of our dear alma mater will have been ruined.

HateRed said:

---

Then CAL should go independent. I have no interest in CAL being a part of a lower tier conference. If Christ and JK have done nothing to help us get into the BIG if the PAC 12 implodes, then what little philanthropic support I give to Berkeley will stop. The athletic part of our dear alma mater will have been ruined.

---

I'd rather be dead than be in Memorial on a Friday night at 9:30pm for a Cal vs. New Mexico State game, surrounded by 12,000 other fans, listening to a Bear Growls contest sponsored by Learfield, and sipping on lukewarm $7 hot chocolate.

As a San Diegan, the one main thing that has hamstrung support of SDSU is their weak conference and the boring, crappy opponents they play, year in and year out. That is the reason San Diegans don't support them very well.

If this happens to Cal, I'm out.

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

HateRed said:

---

Then CAL should go independent. I have no interest in CAL being a part of a lower tier conference. If Christ and JK have done nothing to help us get into the BIG if the PAC 12 implodes, then what little philanthropic support I give to Berkeley will stop. The athletic part of our dear alma mater will have been ruined.

---

I'd rather be dead than be in Memorial on a Friday night at 9:30pm for a Cal vs. New Mexico State game, surrounded by 12,000 other fans, listening to a Bear Growls contest sponsored by Learfield, and sipping on lukewarm $7 hot chocolate.

As a San Diegan, the one main thing that has hamstrung support of SDSU is their weak conference and the boring, crappy opponents they play, year in and year out. That is the reason San Diegans don't support them very well.

If this happens to Cal, I'm out.

---

On the positive side though, the participants of the bear growl will be rabid drunk fans instead of the 4-6 year old squeakers. I mean only the rabid will come to watch a MWC Cal team.

Econ141 said:

---

If we get paid just cents on the dollar, I imagine ucla's Calimony would then have to be significant. Here's hoping we can keep them in the B1G cellar out of pure spite and jealousy.

---

You're still on about this?

philly1121 said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

If we get paid just cents on the dollar, I imagine ucla's Calimony would then have to be significant. Here's hoping we can keep them in the B1G cellar out of pure spite and jealousy.

---

You're still on about this?

---

As I said at the time, I really think our trying to block UCLA was a mistake. The pressure we applied via the Regents should have been to make us a package deal.

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

HateRed said:

---

Then CAL should go independent. I have no interest in CAL being a part of a lower tier conference. If Christ and JK have done nothing to help us get into the BIG if the PAC 12 implodes, then what little philanthropic support I give to Berkeley will stop. The athletic part of our dear alma mater will have been ruined.

---

I'd rather be dead than be in Memorial on a Friday night at 9:30pm for a Cal vs. New Mexico State game, surrounded by 12,000 other fans, listening to a Bear Growls contest sponsored by Learfield, and sipping on lukewarm $7 hot chocolate.

As a San Diegan, the one main thing that has hamstrung support of SDSU is their weak conference and the boring, crappy opponents they play, year in and year out. That is the reason San Diegans don't support them very well.

If this happens to Cal, I'm out.

---

Cal and Stanford athletic departments are facing a grim future.

Stanford got scratch. Lots of scratch.

BearSD said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

HateRed said:

---

Then CAL should go independent. I have no interest in CAL being a part of a lower tier conference. If Christ and JK have done nothing to help us get into the BIG if the PAC 12 implodes, then what little philanthropic support I give to Berkeley will stop. The athletic part of our dear alma mater will have been ruined.

---

I'd rather be dead than be in Memorial on a Friday night at 9:30pm for a Cal vs. New Mexico State game, surrounded by 12,000 other fans, listening to a Bear Growls contest sponsored by Learfield, and sipping on lukewarm $7 hot chocolate.

As a San Diegan, the one main thing that has hamstrung support of SDSU is their weak conference and the boring, crappy opponents they play, year in and year out. That is the reason San Diegans don't support them very well.

If this happens to Cal, I'm out.

---

Cal and Stanford athletic departments are facing a grim future.

---

No one seems to want either schools and neither would go MWC!! Nor play in a league with any of those teams. Sorry. We are either out or independent.

People thinking Stanford and Cal are in the same boat are fretting.

Stanford has billions in revenue. They could easily go independent in athletics and survive if they chose to. Plenty of football teams will welcome the Bay Area trip and being able to pack their dead ass stadium. And they can keep their non-rev sports localized if they want to minimize costs.

Cal is in heavy debt and will be so for the rest of our lifetimes. They need a major conference to survive.

"Now, now, stop fighting stanfurd and Cal. You both were let into the Big 10
as football whipping boys and, of course, for your academic reputations which
make us all look good."

It breaks my heart to say it, but if college football means paying attention to annual media revenues, forcing our student athletes to constantly travel cross country instead of going to school, and allowing ESPN and Fox executives to make decisions that dramatically impact our university, then I don't want to be a fan of college football anymore. I'd rather convert Memorial stadium into dorms, flip Hughes stadium into the foitball stadium, and enjoy small market college football as it used to be: tradition, regionality, and fun, and say f&ck you to what college football has turned into.

Blueblood said:

---

"Now, now, stop fighting stanfurd and Cal. You both were let into the Big 10
as football whipping boys and, of course, for your academic reputations."

---

Blue, your longtime dream of Cal joining the MWC May come to fruition after all.

HateRed said:

---

Then CAL should go independent. I have no interest in CAL being a part of a lower tier conference. If Christ and JK have done nothing to help us get into the BIG if the PAC 12 implodes, then what little philanthropic support I give to Berkeley will stop. The athletic part of our dear alma mater will have been ruined.

---

If Cal gets into the B1G will you promise to substantially INCREASE your financial support of Cal.

After all fair is fair. And Cal will need it to try to compete in the B1G.

oskithepimp said:

---

It breaks my heart to say it, but if college football means paying attention to annual media revenues, forcing our student athletes to constantly travel cross country instead of going to school, and allowing ESPN and Fox executives to make decisions that dramatically impact our university, then I don't want to be a fan of college football anymore. I'd rather convert Memorial stadium into dorms, flip Hughes stadium into the foitball stadium, and enjoy small market college football as it used to be: tradition, regionality, and fun, and say f&ck you to what college football has turned into.

---

Disagree. I'd rather we do away with sports altogether (like Chicago) than have the cloud of sports program failure hang over our heads. Let Berkeley be the "hardcore academic where super nerds go" UC and let UCLA be the "where the cool jock kids go" UC. I don't know the answer to this, but will Cal have been the first flagship public university of any state to go from P5 to obscurity/nothing due to apathy and mismanagement? That stink of incompetency and failure after decades of athletic pride lip service will not wash off for a long time.

Your statement above, to me, smells like unjustified elitism, which is exactly how we find ourselves in this situation in the first place.

Pay attention to annual media revenues? Yes. That is called budgeting, a necessary economic activity to merely be a going concern, and every institution does this, not just athletic departments.

Student athletes traveling? Yes! This is not new. The point isn't for us to say what student athletes should or should not want to do. The point is that we inform them of what the deal entails. You want to compete athletically with the best? Great! Guess what, "the best" don't all exist just in our own little region. If you really want to test your mettle, you have to go to where the best are. That means travel. That's the deal. They enter this relationship with Cal eyes wide open, and if they DON'T want to travel, then they can choose to enter this relationship with one of the many schools that DO only compete regionally. But it won't be against the best...

As a thought experiment, consider this. What if Cal is "relegated" to being a regional player, and we all hand wave the situation away saying "well, we didn't want to have to do all that stuff and listen to all those executives (i.e. stakeholders) and XYZ anyways because we're better than that," all the while Stanford goes independent or eventually finds a P2 home and continues successfully competing nationally? How is this perceived as anything other than failure on Cal's part? We are going to hand wave all that away, secure in knowing that we are Cal and therefore above all that, when just across the bay there is a shining example of success in all things in which we've failed because we believed we were above it? To those on the outside looking in, they are not going to look at Cal and look at Stanford and think Stanford is "worse" or "bad" because they DO engage with media and DO want to be the best they can be in athletics while Cal is "better" because they chose not to. They will see Stanford = success, Cal = failure. That's just the reality. To think otherwise takes a serious lack of self-awareness, in my opinion.

To be honest I don't really mean to direct this wall of text at you oksithepimp, but it's how I feel about the whole thing and the past few days have been an emotional roller coaster as I grapple with the possible reality of the team that I love and care for so much not existing or becoming a shell of its former self.

If it does, it will be because of institutional apathy. And there is no way I am going let those who WERE apathetic, and therefore caused this situation, step on those of us who weren't, while continuing to claim the moral and academic high ground for it when again, just across the bay, there is a shining example of success in the thing we deemed beneath us by an institution that most of the world still holds in higher academic regard.

If we are who we say we are, we aim to be the best in whatever we choose to do. We don't choose to do something just to be "okay" or "merely competitive" in it. Whether its academics, athletics, or whatever, we should be in it to win it or we don't do it at all.

Well said, my fellow Cal Bear.

calumnus said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

If we get paid just cents on the dollar, I imagine ucla's Calimony would then have to be significant. Here's hoping we can keep them in the B1G cellar out of pure spite and jealousy.

---

You're still on about this?

---

As I said at the time, I really think our trying to block UCLA was a mistake. The pressure we applied via the Regents should have been to make us a package deal.

---

Agree but the Regents are a bunch of wusses. I would have gone to the mat. Take Cal or no UCLA. There were many legal grounds for making a legitimate lawsuit. My feeling was that without UCLA USC would not have made the move.

GivemTheAxe said:

---

calumnus said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

If we get paid just cents on the dollar, I imagine ucla's Calimony would then have to be significant. Here's hoping we can keep them in the B1G cellar out of pure spite and jealousy.

---

You're still on about this?

---

As I said at the time, I really think our trying to block UCLA was a mistake. The pressure we applied via the Regents should have been to make us a package deal.

---

Agree but the Regents are a bunch of wusses. I would have gone to the mat. Take Cal or no UCLA. There were many legal grounds for making a legitimate lawsuit. My feeling was that without UCLA USC would not have made the move.

---

With the right approach UCLA might have welcomed a push to get us in too. It didn't have to be confrontational. We will never know because that was not our approach. We alienated a lot of people we now need to want us.

Hopefully we get in anyway, but without the ability to leverage the LA market it is far less certain and will probably cost us a lot of lost revenue.

GivemTheAxe said:

---

calumnus said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

If we get paid just cents on the dollar, I imagine ucla's Calimony would then have to be significant. Here's hoping we can keep them in the B1G cellar out of pure spite and jealousy.

---

You're still on about this?

---

As I said at the time, I really think our trying to block UCLA was a mistake. The pressure we applied via the Regents should have been to make us a package deal.

---

Agree but the Regents are a bunch of wusses. I would have gone to the mat. Take Cal or no UCLA. There were many legal grounds for making a legitimate lawsuit. My feeling was that without UCLA USC would not have made the move.

---

USC was going to the B1G whether UCLA went or not.

BigDaddy said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

calumnus said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

If we get paid just cents on the dollar, I imagine ucla's Calimony would then have to be significant. Here's hoping we can keep them in the B1G cellar out of pure spite and jealousy.

---

You're still on about this?

---

As I said at the time, I really think our trying to block UCLA was a mistake. The pressure we applied via the Regents should have been to make us a package deal.

---

Agree but the Regents are a bunch of wusses. I would have gone to the mat. Take Cal or no UCLA. There were many legal grounds for making a legitimate lawsuit. My feeling was that without UCLA USC would not have made the move.

---

USC was going to the B1G whether UCLA went or not.

---

And with UCLA, the Pac-11 would have most likely had a viable media contract.

golden sloth said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

calumnus said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

If we get paid just cents on the dollar, I imagine ucla's Calimony would then have to be significant. Here's hoping we can keep them in the B1G cellar out of pure spite and jealousy.

---

You're still on about this?

---

As I said at the time, I really think our trying to block UCLA was a mistake. The pressure we applied via the Regents should have been to make us a package deal.

---

Agree but the Regents are a bunch of wusses. I would have gone to the mat. Take Cal or no UCLA. There were many legal grounds for making a legitimate lawsuit. My feeling was that without UCLA USC would not have made the move.

---

USC was going to the B1G whether UCLA went or not.

---

And with UCLA, the Pac-11 would have most likely had a viable media contract.

---

Definitely.

But again, the intent would not be to block UCLA and hold them back, the intent would be to convince everyone concerned that it would be best to take Cal (and Stanford) too.

BigDaddy said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

calumnus said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

If we get paid just cents on the dollar, I imagine ucla's Calimony would then have to be significant. Here's hoping we can keep them in the B1G cellar out of pure spite and jealousy.

---

You're still on about this?

---

As I said at the time, I really think our trying to block UCLA was a mistake. The pressure we applied via the Regents should have been to make us a package deal.

---

Agree but the Regents are a bunch of wusses. I would have gone to the mat. Take Cal or no UCLA. There were many legal grounds for making a legitimate lawsuit. My feeling was that without UCLA USC would not have made the move.

---

USC was going to the B1G whether UCLA went or not.

---

Exactly. UCLA's decision was between going with USC, or staying while Washington or Oregon joined the Big Ten with USC. Can't blame UCLA for making the only choice that wasn't stupid.

Bobodeluxe said:

---

Stanford got scratch. Lots of scratch.

---

and its our only hope

i really hope Cal and Stanford stick together no matter what

at least we have not heatd the stanford/notre dame pairing in this recent B1G expansion talks

HoopDreams said:

---

i really hope Cal and Stanford stick together no matter what

at least we have not heatd the stanford/notre dame pairing in this recent B1G expansion talks

---

Could you have imagined if they took ore/UW/Stan? At that point we would have no future.

HateRed said:

---

Then CAL should go independent. I have no interest in CAL being a part of a lower tier conference. If Christ and JK have done nothing to help us get into the BIG if the PAC 12 implodes, then what little philanthropic support I give to Berkeley will stop. The athletic part of our dear alma mater will have been ruined.

---

Imagining Knowlton trying to navigate the AD and all of its underlying teams as an independent. Lol. At least he'd finally be earning the paycheck.

Converting Memorial into dorms isnt happening. It's a historical building, sits on a fault and we owe a ton of debt on it. Where would the money come from to build a new smaller stadium? Oh let's borrow some more when we are gonna be getting less revenue!

Cal and Stanfurd should be on the phone with the ACC and ND right now. Figure something out. For travel sake, add Oregon State + Wazzu add SDSU and SMU(?), Call Apple tell them to start talking to NBC & ND & the ACC. At least bridge us until the ACC finally falls apart. Then either the ACC really backfills with our West Coast pod or the Big 10 take us and Furd.

And yes time for us to also grovel and call the Big 12 and see what they say.

Create some new options Chancellor!!!!

And then let's get all Cal alumni to donate to the Ca Legends NIL. Build up that NIL war chest for 2024. Let's tell the college football.world (And bball) that Cal can and will play the NIL game. Ohhh get our Pro Bears to start this campaign. Jaylen Brown, Aaron Rodgers, Jared Goff, etc. Kick in some more cash!!!

The blame game...

Meme Gold 🤣#Pac12 #FightOn #GoBruins #BigTen #B1G pic.twitter.com/GVoJrurCwp

— Top 10 College Football Talk (@Top10CFBTalk) August 3, 2023

LunchTime said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

HateRed said:

---

Since we have not heard a peep from either CAL or Stanford, maybe, just maybe there is something we don't know??? It's odd that Christ, JK, nor Stanford have said anything regarding realignment. Let's all hope the PAC survives without adding schools that are not our peers academically. I, for one, will not be into CAL football if Fresno State, Boise State, UNLV, etc are in our conference. So, here's hoping Christ and JK have done something good for us.

---

Oregon and Wash go to the Big 10; Zona, Zona State. and Utah go to the Big 12. Remaining Pac teams (just four--Cal, Stan, Wazzu, and Oregon State) will have no choice but to pluck from the Mountain West Conference or to merge with the Mountain West Conference. This seems to be the evolving consensus among the pundits.

This will be painful for those four remaining Pac schools, financially and otherwise. Cal sadly drops to a lower-level with intercollegiate athletics or elects to exit the space altogether. This would be very sad for Cal sports. The end of an era. Dearly hope it doesn't end this way.

---

Sorry, Cal Furd OSU and WSU isn't rebuilding the Pac.

The Pac would be dead, and Cal would be in the middle of an ocean of mid majors, begging for a couple million a year.

---

There are no good answers here.

I read Edwin Bear's post, and I take his point about going the U Chicago route and getting out of big time college sports. But I don't think that's really an option. For better or worse, Cal borrowed a ton of money on CMS, and we need to at least appear to be trying to service the debt. In time, (10-15 years) with inflation, a bail out of some sort will become more palatable.

A reimagined PAC or a MWC with 4 PAC 12 teams isn't great, but it arguably improves the product in the MWC, so it would be a better conference than it is today. I still say that crappy teams or not, it'd be more fun and draw more people to see California schools - even if they are Fresno, San Diego, and San Jose, than to see Illinois, Rutgers, and Indiana and have to travel to College Park and State College and Lansing. But that's just me.

Independent has been thrown out there. We're not Notre Dame. Not a particularly big draw outside our region. So what does that look like? 4 -5 early season games in which we get scheduled by teams like Georgia or Alabama or Ohio State to try to notch an easy win against a "quality opponent?" We host (or visit) Stanford and then play ---who? Most likely the same teams we'd play in the MWC, I'm guessing.

The best-of-bad-options-scenario I want at this point: the ACC (widely predicted to be the next conference to blow up) has teams available. In this hypothetical scenario, we form a bicoastal conference with a Western Division of: Cal, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington State, and team TBD (SMU? Rice?) and an Eastern Division of: Duke, North Carolina, North Carolina State, Virginia, and Wake Forrest. We can provide programming all of college game day (including that late night game they love back east) and should be competitive in football and basketball. And they'd be good schools to work together academically as well.

Whatever comes, here is the reality: we aren't even going to have Wilcox-level money after this season. It's going to be going back to doing football on the cheap and a pivot to basketball. Fewer coaches; fewer players. Small schools can do very well in basketball, and for the moment, we are going to have to think like a small school because that's what we will be as a practical matter - at least financially.

SoFlaBear said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

PaulCali said:

---

HateRed said:

---

Since we have not heard a peep from either CAL or Stanford, maybe, just maybe there is something we don't know??? It's odd that Christ, JK, nor Stanford have said anything regarding realignment. Let's all hope the PAC survives without adding schools that are not our peers academically. I, for one, will not be into CAL football if Fresno State, Boise State, UNLV, etc are in our conference. So, here's hoping Christ and JK have done something good for us.

---

Oregon and Wash go to the Big 10; Zona, Zona State. and Utah go to the Big 12. Remaining Pac teams (just four--Cal, Stan, Wazzu, and Oregon State) will have no choice but to pluck from the Mountain West Conference or to merge with the Mountain West Conference. This seems to be the evolving consensus among the pundits.

This will be painful for those four remaining Pac schools, financially and otherwise. Cal sadly drops to a lower-level with intercollegiate athletics or elects to exit the space altogether. This would be very sad for Cal sports. The end of an era. Dearly hope it doesn't end this way.

---

Sorry, Cal Furd OSU and WSU isn't rebuilding the Pac.

The Pac would be dead, and Cal would be in the middle of an ocean of mid majors, begging for a couple million a year.

---

There are no good answers here.

I read Edwin Bear's post, and I take his point about going the U Chicago route and getting out of big time college sports. But I don't think that's really an option. For better or worse, Cal borrowed a ton of money on CMS, and we need to at least appear to be trying to service the debt. In time, (10-15 years) with inflation, a bail out of some sort will become more palatable.

A reimagined PAC or a MWC with 4 PAC 12 teams isn't great, but it arguably improves the product in the MWC, so it would be a better conference than it is today. I still say that crappy teams or not, it'd be more fun and draw more people to see California schools - even if they are Fresno, San Diego, and San Jose, than to see Illinois, Rutgers, and Indiana and have to travel to College Park and State College and Lansing. But that's just me.

Independent has been thrown out there. We're not Notre Dame. Not a particularly big draw outside our region. So what does that look like? 4 -5 early season games in which we get scheduled by teams like Georgia or Alabama or Ohio State to try to notch an easy win against a "quality opponent?" We host (or visit) Stanford and then play ---who? Most likely the same teams we'd play in the MWC, I'm guessing.

The best-of-bad-options-scenario I want at this point: the ACC (widely predicted to be the next conference to blow up) has teams available. In this hypothetical scenario, we form a bicoastal conference with a Western Division of: Cal, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington State, and team TBD (SMU? Rice?) and an Eastern Division of: Duke, North Carolina, North Carolina State, Virginia, and Wake Forrest. We can provide programming all of college game day (including that late night game they love back east) and should be competitive in football and basketball. And they'd be good schools to work together academically as well.

Whatever comes, here is the reality: we aren't even going to have Wilcox-level money after this season. It's going to be going back to doing football on the cheap and a pivot to basketball. Fewer coaches; fewer players. Small schools can do very well in basketball, and for the moment, we are going to have to think like a small school because that's what we will be as a practical matter - at least financially.

---

Guess that rules out ever buying out any of our present coaches who are on multi-year contracts

Understandably, emotions are running high here with all posters. And as an older aged fan I can see the validity of all points of view here.

The reality is, college football and college basketball are no longer indicative of their title. With all of the money that flies around these days, these sports are really minor league football and minor league basketball. It is what it is.

Half of us want to move on with the way things are, the other half wishes it was like the old days. Neither half is completely wrong. Trying to fit what is regarded as the top public college in the country into an athletic power house is liking fitting a square into a circle. It's difficult. Some think we can, some thing we can't. Again, nobody is completely wrong nor completely right. Bottom line, there's very little control by us as to how this all plays out. May the chips fall as they may.

Go Bears!