If you remove CSU, UNT, and Temple and added Army, Navy, and Air Force, move SMU to the West, keep Stanford in the conference, keep the Calimomy, and the TV revenue is sufficient (not really sure what our bare minimum is), then it's not the worst retirement home for the old relics of college football.

Cal, Stanford, the services academies, Rice, Tulane, SMU, our old conference foes OSU and WSU plus enough geographic adds to make it make sense and wait as more teams get relegated to our level. Duke, Pitt, Syracuse may become available soon. Maybe some day Vandy and Northwestern join us.

I mean, it sucks. And it is depressing. But it's probably the lowest Cal can fall and it make sense to carry on. For me anyway. But you need Stanford and the service academies plus enough money to make it just barely respectable enough to where I would still care that Cal had a football team.

I assume this is happening.

Was told tonight by a high ranking official at a current Pac-12 school that barring a last minute miracle, the B1G and ACC will not be offering Cal or Stanford. Said both schools are dead in the water for those two leagues.

This AAC deal is being brokered by Oliver Luck and appears to be the best landing spot available.

BigDaddy said:

---

I assume this is happening.

Was told tonight by a high ranking official at a current Pac-12 school that barring a last minute miracle, the B1G and ACC will not be offering Cal or Stanford. Said both schools are dead in the water for both leagues.

This AAC deal is being brokered by Oliver Luck and appears to be the best landing spot available.

---

I certainly hope we are continuing to negotiate with the B1G/Fox and the ACC (flipping a holdout) before we give up and sign onto this turd and if so, we can leave with no exit fee if a P4 offer comes.

How much will it pay? $20 million per school? 20 million?

If the AAC pays $7 million a year, why would ESPN "tear up its contract" to increase the payout for 14 schools to $20 million? With the PAC-4, that is $262 million in new money just to find a home for the PAC-4? ($65.5 million per PAC-4 school). Why not offer half that to the ACC to take Cal and Stanford and let WSU and OSU join the MWC at $5 million?


ESPN would have been far better off just matching tge B-12 offer for the PAC-10.

ESPN and the PAC-4 should be able to both be better off with a PAC-4 then a PAC-8 leaving the 14 schools in the AAC under their current contract.

And whatever offer we get from this, I sure hope we offer to take the same amount from the B1G.

berserkeley said:

---

If you remove CSU, UNT, and Temple and added Army, Navy, and Air Force, move SMU to the West, keep Stanford in the conference, keep the Calimomy, and the TV revenue is sufficient (not really sure what our bare minimum is), then it's not the worst retirement home for the old relics of college football.

Cal, Stanford, the services academies, Rice, Tulane, SMU, our old conference foes OSU and WSU plus enough geographic adds to make it make sense and wait as more teams get relegated to our level. Duke, Pitt, Syracuse may become available soon. Maybe some day Vandy and Northwestern join us.

I mean, it sucks. And it is depressing. But it's probably the lowest Cal can fall and it make sense to carry on. For me anyway. But you need Stanford and the service academies plus enough money to make it just barely respectable enough to where I would still care that Cal had a football team.

---

Stanford is not long for a league like this. The B1G could take them and Duke as a pair after the ACC joins the Pac12 in the conference graveyard. Cal needs to make a compelling stand alone case for B1G membership. Not doing that means permanent relegation and lost opportunities for student athletes.

BigDaddy said:

---

I assume this is happening.

Was told tonight by a high ranking official at a current Pac-12 school that barring a last minute miracle, the B1G and ACC will not be offering Cal or Stanford. Said both schools are dead in the water for both leagues.

This AAC deal is being brokered by Oliver Luck and appears to be the best landing spot available.

---

The ACC doesn't want or need Cal/Stanford at this time. Frankly, I don't blame them. Why bother? They've got a hot civil war ongoing with Clemson/FSU and much bigger fish to fry at the moment.

Once Fox/Disney can figure out how to destroy the ACC they will do it. So Cal would be back to begging the B1G for membership in a few years anyway.

phyrux said:

---

berserkeley said:

---

If you remove CSU, UNT, and Temple and added Army, Navy, and Air Force, move SMU to the West, keep Stanford in the conference, keep the Calimomy, and the TV revenue is sufficient (not really sure what our bare minimum is), then it's not the worst retirement home for the old relics of college football.

Cal, Stanford, the services academies, Rice, Tulane, SMU, our old conference foes OSU and WSU plus enough geographic adds to make it make sense and wait as more teams get relegated to our level. Duke, Pitt, Syracuse may become available soon. Maybe some day Vandy and Northwestern join us.

I mean, it sucks. And it is depressing. But it's probably the lowest Cal can fall and it make sense to carry on. For me anyway. But you need Stanford and the service academies plus enough money to make it just barely respectable enough to where I would still care that Cal had a football team.

---

Stanford is not long for a league like this. The B1G could take them and Duke as a pair after the ACC joins the Pac12 in the conference graveyard. Cal needs to make a compelling stand alone case for B1G membership. Not doing that means permanent relegation and lost opportunities for student athletes.

---

Welcome to our board. What is your school allegiance?

I don't think either Cal or Stanford is long for a league like this but I do think Cal and Stanford both recognize that our rivalry is all we have left and will be loathe to give that up. Duke's GORs expire in 2036. I think Duke and North Carolina stick together for similar reasons. If Cal or Stanford go to the B1G, I am confident we go together.

Our current leadership has been particularly inept, but our chancellor retires a year from now and hopefully our AD will be gone before then.

calumnus said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

I assume this is happening.

Was told tonight by a high ranking official at a current Pac-12 school that barring a last minute miracle, the B1G and ACC will not be offering Cal or Stanford. Said both schools are dead in the water for both leagues.

This AAC deal is being brokered by Oliver Luck and appears to be the best landing spot available.

---

I certainly hope we are continuing to negotiate with the B1G/Fox and the ACC (flipping a holdout) before we give up and sign onto this turd and if so, we can leave with no exit fee if a P4 offer comes.

How much will it pay? $20 million per school? 20 million?

If the AAC pays $7 million a year, why would ESPN "tear up its contract" to increase the payout for 14 schools to $20 million? With the PAC-4, that is $262 million in new money just to find a home for the PAC-4? ($65.5 million per PAC-4 school). Why not offer half that to the ACC to take Cal and Stanford and let WSU and OSU join the MWC at $5 million?


ESPN would have been far better off just matching tge B-12 offer for the PAC-10.

ESPN and the PAC-4 should be able to both be better off with a PAC-4 then a PAC-8 leaving the 14 schools in the AAC under their current contract.

And whatever offer we get from this, I sure hope we offer to take the same amount from the B1G.

---

ESPN wouldn't tear up its contract. The AAC would vote to dissolve. No AAC, no contract. That's why so many AAC trams would be taken; have to take them to get their votes to dissolve.

And this rumor doesn't suggest how much each team would be getting. Hard to imagine it's $20M per team.

Also hard to imagine that you could skim off the payout of a handful of teams to get the $102M required to buy SDSU, Boise St, and CSU out of their MWC deal. Also hard to imagine that schools concerned with the academic pedigree of their conference mates would expell a service academy in favor of some of these teams.

juarezbear said:

---

BREAKING: Pacific American deal may be done in principal. Hard ball dealings at end. American will dissolve to pay NO exit fees, and 11 AAC teams will receive invites to the PAC. UNT, UAB, UTSA, Rice and FAU will receive lower shares to pay for SDSU, CSU & Boise for a 2025 start. pic.twitter.com/1oApfa3HPS

— OS_Beaver (@OS_Beaver) August 16, 2023

---

If true, expect a stampede to the Portal

JimSox said:

---

Oh wait. What about the $$$? I see ESPN and Apple graphics on that diagram. Starting to think this is fiction.

---

There are rumors that ESPN has agreed to waive the GOR for a piece of this new league. Apple requires Cal and Stanford to be a part of it along with the other P4 holdovers and SDSU and SMU. This has some legs. But requires Cal and Stanford to be a part of it. Cal I think will bite. Stanford I am less sure would. But if both get shut out of the B1G and ACC as expected who knows.

If this league stays as a P5 member it will bring CFP monies and an autoberth. However the CFP committee is expected to change the distribution model and selection criteria. They meet on August 30 to discuss and it is expected they go to 5 autobid format (4 P4 programs and 1 G5 selection) with 7 at large bid going to the next 7 highest rated teams.

This conference will almost certainly not retain P5 membership. It can be changed by the committee. And likely will. It does look like it would be the best G5 league however. But expect in 2026 when the CFP is under a different media agreement for the distributions to go down even more.

berserkeley said:

---

calumnus said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

I assume this is happening.

Was told tonight by a high ranking official at a current Pac-12 school that barring a last minute miracle, the B1G and ACC will not be offering Cal or Stanford. Said both schools are dead in the water for both leagues.

This AAC deal is being brokered by Oliver Luck and appears to be the best landing spot available.

---

I certainly hope we are continuing to negotiate with the B1G/Fox and the ACC (flipping a holdout) before we give up and sign onto this turd and if so, we can leave with no exit fee if a P4 offer comes.

How much will it pay? $20 million per school? 20 million?

If the AAC pays $7 million a year, why would ESPN "tear up its contract" to increase the payout for 14 schools to $20 million? With the PAC-4, that is $262 million in new money just to find a home for the PAC-4? ($65.5 million per PAC-4 school). Why not offer half that to the ACC to take Cal and Stanford and let WSU and OSU join the MWC at $5 million?


ESPN would have been far better off just matching tge B-12 offer for the PAC-10.

ESPN and the PAC-4 should be able to both be better off with a PAC-4 then a PAC-8 leaving the 14 schools in the AAC under their current contract.

And whatever offer we get from this, I sure hope we offer to take the same amount from the B1G.

---

ESPN wouldn't tear up its contract. The AAC would vote to dissolve. No AAC, no contract. That's why so many AAC trams would be taken; have to take them to get their votes to dissolve.

And this rumor doesn't suggest how much each team would be getting. Hard to imagine it's $20M per team.

Also hard to imagine that you could skim off the payout of a handful of teams to get the $102M required to buy SDSU, Boise St, and CSU out of their MWC deal. Also hard to imagine that schools concerned with the academic pedigree of their conference mates would expell a service academy in favor of some of these teams.

---

Those 3 teams would join in 2025. The exit fee would be cut in half. Those schools would have a full year to gather donor support to help pay the exit fees. Any notion that academics plays a role in these realignments should be clear by now. They are irrelevant. Money is what is relevant. And Navy and the Air Force Academy have been in these leagues for a while now. In what world is Navy and UNT even remotely similar. And likewise the Air Force Academy and Fresno St or New Mexico.

These alliances are about football money. The rumors are for $250M per year and unequal distributions. The P12 remains the league affiliation so they can capture whatever monies are still due the league for NCAA hoops units etc. Those monies would likely all go to the 4 holdover P12 programs.

6956bear said:

---

JimSox said:

---

Oh wait. What about the $$$? I see ESPN and Apple graphics on that diagram. Starting to think this is fiction.

---

There are rumors that ESPN has agreed to waive the GOR for a piece of this new league. Apple requires Cal and Stanford to be a part of it along with the other P4 holdovers and SDSU and SMU. This has some legs. But requires Cal and Stanford to be a part of it. Cal I think will bite. Stanford I am less sure would. But if both get shut out of the B1G and ACC as expected who knows.

If this league stays as a P5 member it will bring CFP monies and an autoberth. However the CFP committee is expected to change the distribution model and selection criteria. They meet on August 30 to discuss and it is expected they go to 5 autobid format (4 P4 programs and 1 G5 selection) with 7 at large bid going to the next 7 highest rated teams.

This conference will almost certainly not retain P5 membership. It can be changed by the committee. And likely will. It does look like it would be the best G5 league however. But expect in 2026 when the CFP is under a different media agreement for the distributions to go down even more.

---

There is no grant of rights for the AAC (and MWC), which is why their teams have been in discussion for expansion.

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Daily/Closing-Bell/2019/03/19/AAC.aspx

Also, dissolving a conference would void the grant of rights - which is why that's a possible out for dissatisfied ACC, if there are enough.

It's unclear what the CFB Playoff can do on terms of their vote at.thr end of the month. The Pac 12 was guaranteed around $40 million for the Rose Bowl in 2024 and 2025 along with ~$70-80 million for the 4 team CFB playoff - then agreed to change the format to the 12 team format, which should yield more money. But there were changes to the payout format that tied payouts to more of a per team share (ie big ten and sec wanted more). It would be pretty self serving if the Pac could be voted out of significant playoff payments, but there might be limits on whether adding g5 teams will allow for pro rated shares. There was never an autobid for being a P5 conference champ.

For 2026, it's pretty clear the equal sharing of the p5 era is over. That might apply to the B12 and ACC as well.

ColoradoBear said:

---

6956bear said:

---

JimSox said:

---

Oh wait. What about the $$$? I see ESPN and Apple graphics on that diagram. Starting to think this is fiction.

---

There are rumors that ESPN has agreed to waive the GOR for a piece of this new league. Apple requires Cal and Stanford to be a part of it along with the other P4 holdovers and SDSU and SMU. This has some legs. But requires Cal and Stanford to be a part of it. Cal I think will bite. Stanford I am less sure would. But if both get shut out of the B1G and ACC as expected who knows.

If this league stays as a P5 member it will bring CFP monies and an autoberth. However the CFP committee is expected to change the distribution model and selection criteria. They meet on August 30 to discuss and it is expected they go to 5 autobid format (4 P4 programs and 1 G5 selection) with 7 at large bid going to the next 7 highest rated teams.

This conference will almost certainly not retain P5 membership. It can be changed by the committee. And likely will. It does look like it would be the best G5 league however. But expect in 2026 when the CFP is under a different media agreement for the distributions to go down even more.

---

There is no grant of rights for the AAC (and MWC), which is why their teams have been in discussion for expansion.

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Daily/Closing-Bell/2019/03/19/AAC.aspx

Also, dissolving a conference would void the grant of rights - which is why that's a possible out for dissatisfied ACC, if there are enough.

It's unclear what the CFB Playoff can do on terms of their vote at.thr end of the month. The Pac 12 was guaranteed around $40 million for the Rose Bowl in 2024 and 2025 along with ~$70-80 million for the 4 team CFB playoff - then agreed to change the format to the 12 team format, which should yield more money. But there were changes to the payout format that tied payouts to more of a per team share (ie big ten and sec wanted more). It would be pretty self serving if the Pac could be voted out of significant playoff payments, but there might be limits on whether adding g5 teams will allow for pro rated shares.

For 2026, it's pretty anywhere near the equal sparing of the p5 era is over. That might apply to the B12 and ACC as well.

---

2026 CFP negotiations will be very interesting. It is expected by many that there will be a new super league formed by then and most if not all the money ends up there. The P2 will be a thing and there could be some sort of lesser championship series for everybody else.

Will be very interesting to see if any new media money comes into play. Fox and ESPN hope not.

6956bear said:

---

berserkeley said:

---

calumnus said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

I assume this is happening.

Was told tonight by a high ranking official at a current Pac-12 school that barring a last minute miracle, the B1G and ACC will not be offering Cal or Stanford. Said both schools are dead in the water for both leagues.

This AAC deal is being brokered by Oliver Luck and appears to be the best landing spot available.

---

I certainly hope we are continuing to negotiate with the B1G/Fox and the ACC (flipping a holdout) before we give up and sign onto this turd and if so, we can leave with no exit fee if a P4 offer comes.

How much will it pay? $20 million per school? 20 million?

If the AAC pays $7 million a year, why would ESPN "tear up its contract" to increase the payout for 14 schools to $20 million? With the PAC-4, that is $262 million in new money just to find a home for the PAC-4? ($65.5 million per PAC-4 school). Why not offer half that to the ACC to take Cal and Stanford and let WSU and OSU join the MWC at $5 million?


ESPN would have been far better off just matching tge B-12 offer for the PAC-10.

ESPN and the PAC-4 should be able to both be better off with a PAC-4 then a PAC-8 leaving the 14 schools in the AAC under their current contract.

And whatever offer we get from this, I sure hope we offer to take the same amount from the B1G.

---

ESPN wouldn't tear up its contract. The AAC would vote to dissolve. No AAC, no contract. That's why so many AAC trams would be taken; have to take them to get their votes to dissolve.

And this rumor doesn't suggest how much each team would be getting. Hard to imagine it's $20M per team.

Also hard to imagine that you could skim off the payout of a handful of teams to get the $102M required to buy SDSU, Boise St, and CSU out of their MWC deal. Also hard to imagine that schools concerned with the academic pedigree of their conference mates would expell a service academy in favor of some of these teams.

---

Those 3 teams would join in 2025. The exit fee would be cut in half. Those schools would have a full year to gather donor support to help pay the exit fees. Any notion that academics plays a role in these realignments should be clear by now. They are irrelevant. Money is what is relevant. And Navy and the Air Force Academy have been in these leagues for a while now. In what world is Navy and UNT even remotely similar. And likewise the Air Force Academy and Fresno St or New Mexico.

These alliances are about football money. The rumors are for $250M per year and unequal distributions. The P12 remains the league affiliation so they can capture whatever monies are still due the league for NCAA hoops units etc. Those monies would likely all go to the 4 holdover P12 programs.

---

Fair, they'd only need $51M to buy those three. Still, that's a lot of money so skim off from others.

Guess I'm not sure how the academies would be valued less. They're bigger brands and draw better attendance than most of the teams in the proposed conference.

Only Boise State, Memphis, USF, Stanford, ECU, and Cal drew more fans than Navy. And Oregon State and Army were the next two in attendance. Plus Navy is AAC so why kick them to the curb? I get booting Charlotte and Tulsa.

Interesting to note: Cal has the highest 5 year average attendance of this proposed group. I suspect that would change if this comes to pass.

calumnus said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

Get ready to be to be in the bottom half of a crap league. We couldn't get well paid coaches to be able to navigate Cal and win....now we expect someone making 50K to do so.

---

Overpaid does not equal good. Knowlton makes $1.3 million a year, need I say more?

---

Knowlton is a hard right Trumper living in arch-conservative Colorado Springs. He even donates to that loon Boebert's campaign. I don't think he cares if he sticks it to Cal on his way out.

6956bear said:

---

ColoradoBear said:

---

6956bear said:

---

JimSox said:

---

Oh wait. What about the $$$? I see ESPN and Apple graphics on that diagram. Starting to think this is fiction.

---

There are rumors that ESPN has agreed to waive the GOR for a piece of this new league. Apple requires Cal and Stanford to be a part of it along with the other P4 holdovers and SDSU and SMU. This has some legs. But requires Cal and Stanford to be a part of it. Cal I think will bite. Stanford I am less sure would. But if both get shut out of the B1G and ACC as expected who knows.

If this league stays as a P5 member it will bring CFP monies and an autoberth. However the CFP committee is expected to change the distribution model and selection criteria. They meet on August 30 to discuss and it is expected they go to 5 autobid format (4 P4 programs and 1 G5 selection) with 7 at large bid going to the next 7 highest rated teams.

This conference will almost certainly not retain P5 membership. It can be changed by the committee. And likely will. It does look like it would be the best G5 league however. But expect in 2026 when the CFP is under a different media agreement for the distributions to go down even more.

---

There is no grant of rights for the AAC (and MWC), which is why their teams have been in discussion for expansion.

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Daily/Closing-Bell/2019/03/19/AAC.aspx

Also, dissolving a conference would void the grant of rights - which is why that's a possible out for dissatisfied ACC, if there are enough.

It's unclear what the CFB Playoff can do on terms of their vote at.thr end of the month. The Pac 12 was guaranteed around $40 million for the Rose Bowl in 2024 and 2025 along with ~$70-80 million for the 4 team CFB playoff - then agreed to change the format to the 12 team format, which should yield more money. But there were changes to the payout format that tied payouts to more of a per team share (ie big ten and sec wanted more). It would be pretty self serving if the Pac could be voted out of significant playoff payments, but there might be limits on whether adding g5 teams will allow for pro rated shares.

For 2026, it's pretty anywhere near the equal sparing of the p5 era is over. That might apply to the B12 and ACC as well.

---

2026 CFP negotiations will be very interesting. It is expected by many that there will be a new super league formed by then and most if not all the money ends up there. The P2 will be a thing and there could be some sort of lesser championship series for everybody else.

Will be very interesting to see if any new media money comes into play. Fox and ESPN hope not.

---

One big question with this AAC proposal - will there be a GOR that prevents movement to a new conference in 2026? If a lot of the value of the TV contract is derived from Cal/Stanford, a TV partner might want that to protect themselves. At the same time, a GOR for a conference that could be stripped of its p5 status is really problematic. Playoff accesss in 2026 will have a huge impact on whether fans even care about the p4+aac and that determines media value.

Maybe this is esentially a 2 year play to let the Pac 4 realize the CFB playoffs payouts in 2024 and 2025 (and NCAA hoops shares), then re-examine where everyone sits?

Again, I'm not sure of the payout format/rules in 2024 and 2025, but under the old playoff contract, the conference was due around 110-120 million per year for 2024 and 2025. That's a lot of money to split if there are reduced shares for new comers.

This is the only recent reporting on this I've found. Not exactly reputable...

11 teams will likely join Pac-12 expansion after the dissolution of AAC in hopes of paying NO exit fees: Reports

(Sportskeeda)

Quote:

---

According to the latest reports, the Pac-12 expansion is reaching the closing stage. The conference is finalizing an agreement to absorb the American Athletic Conference into its fold, ensuring the safety of the Pac-12 in the college sports landscape after months of chaos.

In what has been a tough but progressive negotiation between the two parties over the last week, the AAC will dissolve without its team incurring exit fees. The Pac-12 will subsequently extend invitations to 11 current ACC schools to become full members of the league.

The Pac-12 expansion marks the dawn of a new era for the Power Five conference following a lengthy period of uncertainties. Many analysts and observers in the world of college athletics had predicted the death of the league. However, it appears to be sailing towards safety.

---

SoFlaBear said:

---

This is the only recent reporting on this I've found. Not exactly reputable...

11 teams will likely join Pac-12 expansion after the dissolution of AAC in hopes of paying NO exit fees: Reports

(Sportskeeda)

Quote:

---

According to the latest reports, the Pac-12 expansion is reaching the closing stage. The conference is finalizing an agreement to absorb the American Athletic Conference into its fold, ensuring the safety of the Pac-12 in the college sports landscape after months of chaos.

In what has been a tough but progressive negotiation between the two parties over the last week, the AAC will dissolve without its team incurring exit fees. The Pac-12 will subsequently extend invitations to 11 current ACC schools to become full members of the league.

The Pac-12 expansion marks the dawn of a new era for the Power Five conference following a lengthy period of uncertainties. Many analysts and observers in the world of college athletics had predicted the death of the league. However, it appears to be sailing towards safety.

---

---

I haven't seen the money, but this is nowhere near a power conference, nor is it a continuation of the Pac-12. It is a pile of dog *****

SoFlaBear said:

---

This is the only recent reporting on this I've found. Not exactly reputable...

11 teams will likely join Pac-12 expansion after the dissolution of AAC in hopes of paying NO exit fees: Reports

(Sportskeeda)

Quote:

---

According to the latest reports, the Pac-12 expansion is reaching the closing stage. The conference is finalizing an agreement to absorb the American Athletic Conference into its fold, ensuring the safety of the Pac-12 in the college sports landscape after months of chaos.

In what has been a tough but progressive negotiation between the two parties over the last week, the AAC will dissolve without its team incurring exit fees. The Pac-12 will subsequently extend invitations to 11 current ACC schools to become full members of the league.

The Pac-12 expansion marks the dawn of a new era for the Power Five conference following a lengthy period of uncertainties. Many analysts and observers in the world of college athletics had predicted the death of the league. However, it appears to be sailing towards safety.

---

---

Perhaps. But there was near universal dismissal of the numerous reports regarding the P12 media deal due to the idea they were Big12 anon or YouTubers or some other non reputable reporter. And Canzano and Wilner were give a lot of credibility as P12 "insiders" and real journalists. Yet both were wrong nearly every step of the way.

We do know that Oliver Luck is engaging other conferences on behalf of what is left in the P12. The AAC makes sense because they can dissolve the conference like the ACC can and find new homes for most of its members. And the reported revenues make sense for them.

I think Cal and Stanford will be trying hard this week to change some minds in the ACC. The B1G looks done for now. Would Cal and Stanford actually agree to this new league? Who knows. The devil as always is in the details.

Cal Junkie said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

Get ready to be to be in the bottom half of a crap league. We couldn't get well paid coaches to be able to navigate Cal and win....now we expect someone making 50K to do so.

---

Overpaid does not equal good. Knowlton makes $1.3 million a year, need I say more?

---

Knowlton is a hard right Trumper living in arch-conservative Colorado Springs. He even donates to that loon Boebert's campaign. I don't think he cares if he sticks it to Cal on his way out.

---

Are donation amounts public information that can be searched? Boebert doesn't represent Colorado Springs.

golden sloth said:

---

SoFlaBear said:

---

This is the only recent reporting on this I've found. Not exactly reputable...

11 teams will likely join Pac-12 expansion after the dissolution of AAC in hopes of paying NO exit fees: Reports

(Sportskeeda)

Quote:

---

According to the latest reports, the Pac-12 expansion is reaching the closing stage. The conference is finalizing an agreement to absorb the American Athletic Conference into its fold, ensuring the safety of the Pac-12 in the college sports landscape after months of chaos.

In what has been a tough but progressive negotiation between the two parties over the last week, the AAC will dissolve without its team incurring exit fees. The Pac-12 will subsequently extend invitations to 11 current ACC schools to become full members of the league.

The Pac-12 expansion marks the dawn of a new era for the Power Five conference following a lengthy period of uncertainties. Many analysts and observers in the world of college athletics had predicted the death of the league. However, it appears to be sailing towards safety.

---

---

I haven't seen the money, but this is nowhere near a power conference, nor is it a continuation of the Pac-12. It is a pile of dog *****

---

It is. And it says so much that so many people on this board are seemingly okay with it. Exhibit A to why we have such ****ty leadership…they fit perfectly for who we collectively are

tequila4kapp said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

SoFlaBear said:

---

This is the only recent reporting on this I've found. Not exactly reputable...

11 teams will likely join Pac-12 expansion after the dissolution of AAC in hopes of paying NO exit fees: Reports

(Sportskeeda)

Quote:

---

According to the latest reports, the Pac-12 expansion is reaching the closing stage. The conference is finalizing an agreement to absorb the American Athletic Conference into its fold, ensuring the safety of the Pac-12 in the college sports landscape after months of chaos.

In what has been a tough but progressive negotiation between the two parties over the last week, the AAC will dissolve without its team incurring exit fees. The Pac-12 will subsequently extend invitations to 11 current ACC schools to become full members of the league.

The Pac-12 expansion marks the dawn of a new era for the Power Five conference following a lengthy period of uncertainties. Many analysts and observers in the world of college athletics had predicted the death of the league. However, it appears to be sailing towards safety.

---

---

I haven't seen the money, but this is nowhere near a power conference, nor is it a continuation of the Pac-12. It is a pile of dog *****

---

It is. And it says so much that so many people on this board are seemingly okay with it. Exhibit A to why we have such ****ty leadership…they fit perfectly for who we collectively are

---

Who on this board is OK with it?

6956bear said:

---

SoFlaBear said:

---

This is the only recent reporting on this I've found. Not exactly reputable...

11 teams will likely join Pac-12 expansion after the dissolution of AAC in hopes of paying NO exit fees: Reports

(Sportskeeda)

Quote:

---

According to the latest reports, the Pac-12 expansion is reaching the closing stage. The conference is finalizing an agreement to absorb the American Athletic Conference into its fold, ensuring the safety of the Pac-12 in the college sports landscape after months of chaos.

In what has been a tough but progressive negotiation between the two parties over the last week, the AAC will dissolve without its team incurring exit fees. The Pac-12 will subsequently extend invitations to 11 current ACC schools to become full members of the league.

The Pac-12 expansion marks the dawn of a new era for the Power Five conference following a lengthy period of uncertainties. Many analysts and observers in the world of college athletics had predicted the death of the league. However, it appears to be sailing towards safety.

---

---

Perhaps. But there was near universal dismissal of the numerous reports regarding the P12 media deal due to the idea they were Big12 anon or YouTubers or some other non reputable reporter. And Canzano and Wilner were give a lot of credibility as P12 "insiders" and real journalists. Yet both were wrong nearly every step of the way.

We do know that Oliver Luck is engaging other conferences on behalf of what is left in the P12. The AAC makes sense because they can dissolve the conference like the ACC can and find new homes for most of its members. And the reported revenues make sense for them.

I think Cal and Stanford will be trying hard this week to change some minds in the ACC. The B1G looks done for now. Would Cal and Stanford actually agree to this new league? Who knows. The devil as always is in the details.

---

I agree that this is entirely in keeping with what people had reported Oliver Luck had been brought in to accomplish, and likely explains why Stanford is going along with this.

Seriously - since the Big 12 keeps leaving them at the altar - we should also reach out to U Conn (and U Mass, since we are there anyway).

At this point, no minds are going to be changed in the ACC. FSU didn't announce a departure yesterday, which was a deadline - so my guess is that they will now try their own mind-changing campaign to find 4 more teams to dissolve the GOR or dissolve the conference so they can go.

ColoradoBear said:

---

Are donation amounts public information that can be searched? Boebert doesn't represent Colorado Springs.

---

Yes.
I've searched and have never come up with anything on JK.

berserkeley said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

SoFlaBear said:

---

This is the only recent reporting on this I've found. Not exactly reputable...

11 teams will likely join Pac-12 expansion after the dissolution of AAC in hopes of paying NO exit fees: Reports

(Sportskeeda)

Quote:

---

According to the latest reports, the Pac-12 expansion is reaching the closing stage. The conference is finalizing an agreement to absorb the American Athletic Conference into its fold, ensuring the safety of the Pac-12 in the college sports landscape after months of chaos.

In what has been a tough but progressive negotiation between the two parties over the last week, the AAC will dissolve without its team incurring exit fees. The Pac-12 will subsequently extend invitations to 11 current ACC schools to become full members of the league.

The Pac-12 expansion marks the dawn of a new era for the Power Five conference following a lengthy period of uncertainties. Many analysts and observers in the world of college athletics had predicted the death of the league. However, it appears to be sailing towards safety.

---

---

I haven't seen the money, but this is nowhere near a power conference, nor is it a continuation of the Pac-12. It is a pile of dog *****

---

It is. And it says so much that so many people on this board are seemingly okay with it. Exhibit A to why we have such ****ty leadership…they fit perfectly for who we collectively are

---

Who on this board is OK with it?

---

Define "OK"

The B1G says they are done adding teams for 2024. At this point, take them at their word. The ACC almost voted us into a - frankly not great-for-us travel situation in a more palatable conference. The key word is "almost." Those four "no" votes won't flip for reasons that have little or nothing to do with Cal and Stanford.

We're not going to drop football. Cal owes over half a billion dollars CMS. Panoramic Hill settlement prevents us from using it for much else until at least 2025 from what has been posted here.

There are no good options. We can debate forever about what the best of the bad options is, but Cal is going to select a bad option. I accept that. Am I "OK" with it? No - I just know it is what it is at this point.

SoFlaBear said:

---

berserkeley said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

SoFlaBear said:

---

This is the only recent reporting on this I've found. Not exactly reputable...

11 teams will likely join Pac-12 expansion after the dissolution of AAC in hopes of paying NO exit fees: Reports

(Sportskeeda)

Quote:

---

According to the latest reports, the Pac-12 expansion is reaching the closing stage. The conference is finalizing an agreement to absorb the American Athletic Conference into its fold, ensuring the safety of the Pac-12 in the college sports landscape after months of chaos.

In what has been a tough but progressive negotiation between the two parties over the last week, the AAC will dissolve without its team incurring exit fees. The Pac-12 will subsequently extend invitations to 11 current ACC schools to become full members of the league.

The Pac-12 expansion marks the dawn of a new era for the Power Five conference following a lengthy period of uncertainties. Many analysts and observers in the world of college athletics had predicted the death of the league. However, it appears to be sailing towards safety.

---

---

I haven't seen the money, but this is nowhere near a power conference, nor is it a continuation of the Pac-12. It is a pile of dog *****

---

It is. And it says so much that so many people on this board are seemingly okay with it. Exhibit A to why we have such ****ty leadership…they fit perfectly for who we collectively are

---

Who on this board is OK with it?

---

Define "OK"

The B1G says they are done adding teams for 2024. At this point, take them at their word. The ACC almost voted us into a - frankly not great-for-us travel situation in a more palatable conference. The key word is "almost." Those four "no" votes won't flip for reasons that have little or nothing to do with Cal and Stanford.

We're not going to drop football. Cal owes over half a billion dollars CMS. Panoramic Hill settlement prevents us from using it for much else until at least 2025 from what has been posted here.

There are no good options. We can debate forever about what the best of the bad options is, but Cal is going to select a bad option. I accept that. Am I "OK" with it? No - I just know it is what it is at this point.

---

There are a lot of details that are important as well;
1. Can teams leave the conference easily?
2. What is the money, and it is divided equally?
3. What is the network and how many games are broadcasted?

A 'bad" option I could maybe live with would be Cal, Stanford, OSU, WSU, SDSU, SMU, Army, Navy, Air Force, Rice. Some sort of 'Pacific Academic Conference'

bipolarbear said:

---

A 'bad" option I could maybe live with would be Cal, Stanford, OSU, WSU, SDSU, SMU, Army, Navy, Air Force, Rice. Some sort of 'Pacific Academic Conference'

---

That's kind of the Western Ivy League option - an idea that was floated back in the 70s that never got traction. The version presented in the original post and in the Sportskeeda piece involves more schools and some additional larger TV markets. For example, USF and FAU represent huge media markets (and recruiting grounds) in Florida.

My guess (and it's only a guess and I'm not sure I'm really buying this whole story) is that the version presented in the original post would involve more broadcast revenue. How much? IDK. Those are the details in which the devil resides.

SoFlaBear said:

---

bipolarbear said:

---

A 'bad" option I could maybe live with would be Cal, Stanford, OSU, WSU, SDSU, SMU, Army, Navy, Air Force, Rice. Some sort of 'Pacific Academic Conference'

---

That's kind of the Western Ivy League option - an idea that was floated back in the 70s that never got traction. The version presented in the original post and in the Sportskeeda piece involves more schools and some additional larger TV markets. For example, USF and FAU represent huge media markets (and recruiting grounds) in Florida.

My guess (and it's only a guess and I'm not sure I'm really buying this whole story) is that the version presented in the original post would involve more broadcast revenue. How much? IDK. Those are the details in which the devil resides.

---

I'm not buying this either, but just for fun: The current AAC TV deal with ESPN (most games on streaming ESPN+) pays the conference about $83 million/year and runs through June 2032. That's an average of just under $6 million annually for each full member.

SoFlaBear said:

---

berserkeley said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

SoFlaBear said:

---

This is the only recent reporting on this I've found. Not exactly reputable...

11 teams will likely join Pac-12 expansion after the dissolution of AAC in hopes of paying NO exit fees: Reports

(Sportskeeda)

Quote:

---

According to the latest reports, the Pac-12 expansion is reaching the closing stage. The conference is finalizing an agreement to absorb the American Athletic Conference into its fold, ensuring the safety of the Pac-12 in the college sports landscape after months of chaos.

In what has been a tough but progressive negotiation between the two parties over the last week, the AAC will dissolve without its team incurring exit fees. The Pac-12 will subsequently extend invitations to 11 current ACC schools to become full members of the league.

The Pac-12 expansion marks the dawn of a new era for the Power Five conference following a lengthy period of uncertainties. Many analysts and observers in the world of college athletics had predicted the death of the league. However, it appears to be sailing towards safety.

---

---

I haven't seen the money, but this is nowhere near a power conference, nor is it a continuation of the Pac-12. It is a pile of dog *****

---

It is. And it says so much that so many people on this board are seemingly okay with it. Exhibit A to why we have such ****ty leadership…they fit perfectly for who we collectively are

---

Who on this board is OK with it?

---

Define "OK"

The B1G says they are done adding teams for 2024. At this point, take them at their word. The ACC almost voted us into a - frankly not great-for-us travel situation in a more palatable conference. The key word is "almost." Those four "no" votes won't flip for reasons that have little or nothing to do with Cal and Stanford.

We're not going to drop football. Cal owes over half a billion dollars CMS. Panoramic Hill settlement prevents us from using it for much else until at least 2025 from what has been posted here.

There are no good options. We can debate forever about what the best of the bad options is, but Cal is going to select a bad option. I accept that. Am I "OK" with it? No - I just know it is what it is at this point.

---

The Regents own the debt if there's no football, not Cal.

Face hard realities: this AAC or the Mt West nonsense do not work, the numbers don't pencil out. We cannot drop below P4 and remain economically viable. There's no point in wasting energy considering such matters.

And that's just the money part. There will be a mass exodus to the portal. The team won't be the team any longer. Since we will be Go5 their replacements will be 2 Star Mt West type guys. And with that our slippage into mid level crap Mt West type level of football becomes entrenched. We could go on and on, but the point should be obvious: these ideas are complete non-starters.

calumnus said:

---

phyrux said:

---

berserkeley said:

---

If you remove CSU, UNT, and Temple and added Army, Navy, and Air Force, move SMU to the West, keep Stanford in the conference, keep the Calimomy, and the TV revenue is sufficient (not really sure what our bare minimum is), then it's not the worst retirement home for the old relics of college football.

Cal, Stanford, the services academies, Rice, Tulane, SMU, our old conference foes OSU and WSU plus enough geographic adds to make it make sense and wait as more teams get relegated to our level. Duke, Pitt, Syracuse may become available soon. Maybe some day Vandy and Northwestern join us.

I mean, it sucks. And it is depressing. But it's probably the lowest Cal can fall and it make sense to carry on. For me anyway. But you need Stanford and the service academies plus enough money to make it just barely respectable enough to where I would still care that Cal had a football team.

---

Stanford is not long for a league like this. The B1G could take them and Duke as a pair after the ACC joins the Pac12 in the conference graveyard. Cal needs to make a compelling stand alone case for B1G membership. Not doing that means permanent relegation and lost opportunities for student athletes.

---

Welcome to our board. What is your school allegiance?

I don't think either Cal or Stanford is long for a league like this but I do think Cal and Stanford both recognize that our rivalry is all we have left and will be loathe to give that up. Duke's GORs expire in 2036. I think Duke and North Carolina stick together for similar reasons. If Cal or Stanford go to the B1G, I am confident we go together.

Our current leadership has been particularly inept, but our chancellor retires a year from now and hopefully our AD will be gone before then.

---

Four decade family association with Cal. UNC and NC State are a natural fit for SEC. That leaves Duke as a likely B1G target. What is the evidence Stanford still values its athletic rivalry with Cal? Harbaugh and Shaw (Norcal guy and Stanford football alum) couldn't have cared less about Big Game traditions. Stanford Big Game attendance cratered long ago. Obviously, it's a bit different now with an Old Blue as their coach but expecting Stanford to push for Cal to the B1G is a fools errand given recent history.

tequila4kapp said:

---

SoFlaBear said:

---

berserkeley said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

SoFlaBear said:

---

This is the only recent reporting on this I've found. Not exactly reputable...

11 teams will likely join Pac-12 expansion after the dissolution of AAC in hopes of paying NO exit fees: Reports

(Sportskeeda)

Quote:

---

According to the latest reports, the Pac-12 expansion is reaching the closing stage. The conference is finalizing an agreement to absorb the American Athletic Conference into its fold, ensuring the safety of the Pac-12 in the college sports landscape after months of chaos.

In what has been a tough but progressive negotiation between the two parties over the last week, the AAC will dissolve without its team incurring exit fees. The Pac-12 will subsequently extend invitations to 11 current ACC schools to become full members of the league.

The Pac-12 expansion marks the dawn of a new era for the Power Five conference following a lengthy period of uncertainties. Many analysts and observers in the world of college athletics had predicted the death of the league. However, it appears to be sailing towards safety.

---

---

I haven't seen the money, but this is nowhere near a power conference, nor is it a continuation of the Pac-12. It is a pile of dog *****

---

It is. And it says so much that so many people on this board are seemingly okay with it. Exhibit A to why we have such ****ty leadership…they fit perfectly for who we collectively are

---

Who on this board is OK with it?

---

Define "OK"

The B1G says they are done adding teams for 2024. At this point, take them at their word. The ACC almost voted us into a - frankly not great-for-us travel situation in a more palatable conference. The key word is "almost." Those four "no" votes won't flip for reasons that have little or nothing to do with Cal and Stanford.

We're not going to drop football. Cal owes over half a billion dollars CMS. Panoramic Hill settlement prevents us from using it for much else until at least 2025 from what has been posted here.

There are no good options. We can debate forever about what the best of the bad options is, but Cal is going to select a bad option. I accept that. Am I "OK" with it? No - I just know it is what it is at this point.

---

The Regents own the debt if there's no football, not Cal.

Face hard realities: this AAC or the Mt West nonsense do not work, the numbers don't pencil out. We cannot drop below P4 and remain economically viable. There's no point in wasting energy considering such matters.

And that's just the money part. There will be a mass exodus to the portal. The team won't be the team any longer. Since we will be Go5 their replacements will be 2 Star Mt West type guys. And with that our slippage into mid level crap Mt West type level of football becomes entrenched. We could go on and on, but the point should be obvious: these ideas are complete non-starters.

---

Why I think the options at this point are B1G OR Big Sky like football. Playing AAC or MWC just to remain alive feels stupid. You still have a ton of expenses. You have cratered your revenue. You will NOT be able to ever compete with the big boys and cal will get SLAUGHTERED during the early season playing for a paycheck. It is an awful situation.

The Big Sky option isn't ideal (and I am not talking the Big Sky but something that emerges form it with Furd, Davis, Cal and Cal Poly at the core. MAYBE the 2 NW school). Costs on the coaching side are radically cut. ditto scholarships (partial mostly). You play in front of 10K fans and be happy to be on campus for a saturday and get to kid your co-worker who went to SLO.

What a Horrible Conference. See Ya!

phyrux said:

---

calumnus said:

---

phyrux said:

---

berserkeley said:

---

If you remove CSU, UNT, and Temple and added Army, Navy, and Air Force, move SMU to the West, keep Stanford in the conference, keep the Calimomy, and the TV revenue is sufficient (not really sure what our bare minimum is), then it's not the worst retirement home for the old relics of college football.

Cal, Stanford, the services academies, Rice, Tulane, SMU, our old conference foes OSU and WSU plus enough geographic adds to make it make sense and wait as more teams get relegated to our level. Duke, Pitt, Syracuse may become available soon. Maybe some day Vandy and Northwestern join us.

I mean, it sucks. And it is depressing. But it's probably the lowest Cal can fall and it make sense to carry on. For me anyway. But you need Stanford and the service academies plus enough money to make it just barely respectable enough to where I would still care that Cal had a football team.

---

Stanford is not long for a league like this. The B1G could take them and Duke as a pair after the ACC joins the Pac12 in the conference graveyard. Cal needs to make a compelling stand alone case for B1G membership. Not doing that means permanent relegation and lost opportunities for student athletes.

---

Welcome to our board. What is your school allegiance?

I don't think either Cal or Stanford is long for a league like this but I do think Cal and Stanford both recognize that our rivalry is all we have left and will be loathe to give that up. Duke's GORs expire in 2036. I think Duke and North Carolina stick together for similar reasons. If Cal or Stanford go to the B1G, I am confident we go together.

Our current leadership has been particularly inept, but our chancellor retires a year from now and hopefully our AD will be gone before then.

---

Four decade family association with Cal. UNC and NC State are a natural fit for SEC. That leaves Duke as a likely B1G target. What is the evidence Stanford still values its athletic rivalry with Cal? Harbaugh and Shaw (Norcal guy and Stanford football alum) couldn't have cared less about Big Game traditions. Stanford Big Game attendance cratered long ago. Obviously, it's a bit different now with an Old Blue as their coach but expecting Stanford to push for Cal to the B1G is a fools errand given recent history.

---

That is an interesting thought about how Furd's football coach and Cal's basketball coach might influence each school's internal deliberations around the future.

This is the best option out of a lot of bad choices. For those saying Cal "just needs to flip one school in the ACC" or "Cal needs to pull out all the stops for the B1G..."

It's over.

Cal had 13+ months to figure this out and failed to do so. So now Cal gets to marry the prettiest girl at the leper colony, and maybe when that next TV deal expires, if we have shown a proper commitment to football and men's basketball, won some league titles etc, you get another bite at the B1G apple.

At this point, no one even knows what college football is going to look like in 8-10 years. Will the TV money dry up? Do the P2 expand again? Do they relegate teams? Is there a Super League of the sport's best brands and who gets left out? Nobody knows. So for the Pac-4, live to fight another day.

SoFlaBear said:

---

bipolarbear said:

---

A 'bad" option I could maybe live with would be Cal, Stanford, OSU, WSU, SDSU, SMU, Army, Navy, Air Force, Rice. Some sort of 'Pacific Academic Conference'

---

That's kind of the Western Ivy League option - an idea that was floated back in the 70s that never got traction. The version presented in the original post and in the Sportskeeda piece involves more schools and some additional larger TV markets. For example, USF and FAU represent huge media markets (and recruiting grounds) in Florida.

My guess (and it's only a guess and I'm not sure I'm really buying this whole story) is that the version presented in the original post would involve more broadcast revenue. How much? IDK. Those are the details in which the devil resides.

---

I know it's a sorry solution, but one where you could at least hold your head up with some pride.