https://apnews.com/article/pac12-stanford-acc-conference-realignment-oregon-washiington-0722c523671cd2e4ac8b42151000bf48

"Leaders from Stanford, California, Oregon State and Washington State spoke Thursday, and Stanford told its colleagues it had informed the ACC that it would be open to joining the conference at greatly reduced or even no media rights payout for several years, a person familiar with the discussions told The Associated Press.
The person spoke on condition of anonymity because the schools were not making their internal discussions public.
Whether getting Stanford and Northern California rival Cal at a cut rate will be enough to convince the necessary 12 of 15 ACC schools to vote to expand remains unknown."

I'm confused by this. If Stanford were willing to take greatly reduced or no media rights payout for several years, wouldn't that also make the Cardinal more attractive to the B1G? If the B1G could get Stanford for no media rights, add a big-name academic stalwart that B1G presidents would approve of, land a share of the 7th or 8th largest media market in the country, and add a school that could help lessen the travel burden for U$C, Ucla, U-Dub, and Niketown U, why would the B1G not be interested in that proposal?

This is the second report of this. This time with more details giving it more credibility. If true, this does not bode well for Cal. Unless the ACC rejects even that offer.

But, seriously, if Stanford was willing to join the ACC for free, then what is up with the B1G? For the ACC, the vote is about the GOR not the schools applying so I can see why they'd vote against it. Does Fox really think Stanford is worth negative dollars?

ACC contract, to my understanding, has a pro-rata clause to add new teams at the same payout as existing teams (as did the Big XII -- at least Power 5 teams up to 16). The Big Ten contract doesn't have this.

If SMU comes in free (already reported), its payout $ is distributed to existing members.
If Stanford comes in free/reduced, the savings is distributed.
If Cal comes in reduced, the savings is distributed.
Also doubt ACC wants one west coast school, so Cal would be added as well.

This $ could be distributed to all teams, and/or disproportionately to FSU/Clemson.

Either way, could prompt a B10 counter to stop ESPN from planting a flag in CA.

I'm willing to bet this all crap. Don't you think CAL would be aware of this?

HateRed said:

---

I'm willing to bet this all crap. Don't you think CAL would be aware of this?

---

Of course Cal is aware. The meeting is tomorrow. Do you think Cal has not asked to be included?

There is no way Cal can do it for free, though, unless someone came in with a billion dollar athletic endowment.

I'm willing to bet you don't know.

This whole business has been absolutely cut-throat, and I find it hard to believe that getting Stanford for little to no media rights for several years wouldn't make the B1G sit up and take notice. I am no lover of Stanford, but it's a brand-name school, the sort of place that university president's like to have on their roster when claiming that they really value world-class academics, and is not all that far removed from an incredibly strong run in football.

BearBoarBlarney said:

---

This whole business has been absolutely cut-throat, and I find it hard to believe that getting Stanford for little to no media rights for several years wouldn't make the B1G sit up and take notice. I am no lover of Stanford, but it's a brand-name school, the sort of place that university president's like to have on their roster when claiming that they really value world-class academics, and is not all that far removed from an incredibly strong run in football.

---

Plus has a long-running series with Notre Dame, who they covet for football.

IMO, this is a strong development that seemingly could push the ACC to vote Stanford (and Cal) in. I think it'd be more easier logistically to have both schools as travel partners.

The risk is the Big Ten dynamic in which B10 could get Stanford for (near) free for many (several?) years -- before the renegotiation. Best hope they feel strongly about having an even # / west coast pod / travel partner / preserving rivalries. On the other hand, Fox/B10 could see this as a clearance BOGO deal of sorts and add Stanford for $20M and get Stanford for free. Hope Drake/Christ are in lock step with Stanford on this.

Notre Dame is not going anywhere until the ACC splinters. They are contractually obligated to join the ACC if the join a conference. But yes, having Stanford, increases the B10's long term leverage over the Irish.

Stanford going for free reduces the chances we have a lifeboat. No chance both Stanford and SMU forgo tens of millions of dollars for us to join and get paid just because we provide a travel partner

Adding Cal at a reduced rate also increases the payout to the existing ACC schools.

See example below:

"ESPN's contract with the ACC reportedly mentions a "pro rata" rate for new schools, meaning that the network would add enough to the contract that the newcomers would get the same share as existing programs."

To get a modest bump in revenue, the ACC could withhold some of the pro rata money from incoming schools for a number of years and split it amongst existing members.

If the ACC added three schools and withheld half of their distributions, the current schools could split an additional $45 million from conference media revenue (not including other conference sources, like the CFP). But splitting $30 million 15 ways would yield only $3 million per school per year."

https://frontofficesports.com/why-expansion-may-not-be-worth-it-for-the-acc/

baytobreakers said:

---

Adding Cal at a reduced rate also increases the payout to the existing ACC schools.

---

Reduce rate is still greater than 0. Why the hell would the two programs that are sending their big guns (Rice and Bush) and willing to not get any money be willing to bring along their "not watching on sidelines" buddy and have said buddy get $10M or more a year?

As someone pointed out here the other day about SMU's offer to take no ACC payout, it makes sense.

If the alternative is getting $7 million/year from the AAC, then you're not giving up $30 million/year by joining the ACC for nothing, because that's $30 million you never had before. You're only giving up $7 million/year.

Agreed. The "Stanford told its colleagues" line, which included Cal, indicates that Stanford is going down the "we'll pay for free" path without Cal.

Seriously where the hell is the B1G? Everyone knew that Oregon State and Washington State were in extreme danger when realignment started. I think most believed that Cal and Stanford would either remain in the Pac, or make the move with Oregon and Washington to the B1G (I'm talking about the general public, not the people on this board).

But at this point Stanford is willing to take $0 to go to the freaking ACC? And the B1G is not involved AT ALL? Like literally, at all?

I had thought that discussions with the ACC were to create a bidding point for the B1G, sort of like Oregon/Washington did with the Big12...but if Stanford is waving around 0 dollars to add them that doesn't really make sense.

The only things that make sense are:

The B1G really REALLY does NOT want Stanford.
Fox really REALLY does NOT want Stanford (even if its free to them and would generate more money for them)
Stanford really REALLY hates the B1G and is trying to stick it to them for killing their conference.

If its the latter, I really hope that they (and Cal) realize that the best way to stick it to the B1G and the teams that left would be to not just join the ACC, but win at a high level, and use the relatively weaker competition to make multiple playoff appearances while Oregon/Washington/UCLA/USC struggle in the B1G.

MrGPAC said:

---

Seriously where the hell is the B1G? Everyone knew that Oregon State and Washington State were in extreme danger when realignment started. I think most believed that Cal and Stanford would either remain in the Pac, or make the move with Oregon and Washington to the B1G (I'm talking about the general public, not the people on this board).

But at this point Stanford is willing to take $0 to go to the freaking ACC? And the B1G is not involved AT ALL? Like literally, at all?

I had thought that discussions with the ACC were to create a bidding point for the B1G, sort of like Oregon/Washington did with the Big12...but if Stanford is waving around 0 dollars to add them that doesn't really make sense.

The only things that make sense are:

The B1G really REALLY does NOT want Stanford.
Fox really REALLY does NOT want Stanford (even if its free to them and would generate more money for them)
Stanford really REALLY hates the B1G and is trying to stick it to them for killing their conference.

If its the latter, I really hope that they (and Cal) realize that the best way to stick it to the B1G and the teams that left would be to not just join the ACC, but win at a high level, and use the relatively weaker competition to make multiple playoff appearances while Oregon/Washington/UCLA/USC struggle in the B1G.

---

This is Stanford's leverage play. They offered ACC for free to get Fox's attention and now B1G is willing to take them in for free through this media cycle. And now that a price floor has been set, there's no reason for B1G to pay us anything either even if we grovel to join their conference.

MrGPAC said:

---

I had thought that discussions with the ACC were to create a bidding point for the B1G, sort of like Oregon/Washington did with the Big12...but if Stanford is waving around 0 dollars to add them that doesn't really make sense.

---

Not trying to be Mr. Gloom And Doom here, but... it's possible that Stanford was told that the four ACC no votes are hard noes that cannot be changed, and the offer to take zero is a last desperate effort to flip one of those votes to yes.

DoubtfulBear said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

Seriously where the hell is the B1G? Everyone knew that Oregon State and Washington State were in extreme danger when realignment started. I think most believed that Cal and Stanford would either remain in the Pac, or make the move with Oregon and Washington to the B1G (I'm talking about the general public, not the people on this board).

But at this point Stanford is willing to take $0 to go to the freaking ACC? And the B1G is not involved AT ALL? Like literally, at all?

I had thought that discussions with the ACC were to create a bidding point for the B1G, sort of like Oregon/Washington did with the Big12...but if Stanford is waving around 0 dollars to add them that doesn't really make sense.

The only things that make sense are:

The B1G really REALLY does NOT want Stanford.
Fox really REALLY does NOT want Stanford (even if its free to them and would generate more money for them)
Stanford really REALLY hates the B1G and is trying to stick it to them for killing their conference.

If its the latter, I really hope that they (and Cal) realize that the best way to stick it to the B1G and the teams that left would be to not just join the ACC, but win at a high level, and use the relatively weaker competition to make multiple playoff appearances while Oregon/Washington/UCLA/USC struggle in the B1G.

---

This is Stanford's leverage play. They offered ACC for free to get Fox's attention and now B1G is willing to take them in for free through this media cycle. And now that a price floor has been set, there's no reason for B1G to pay us anything either even if we grovel to join their conference.

---

If so, her rabid defenders were right, Christ has been playing 3-D chess all along.

What continues to boggle my mind is that if the story were true that Stanford is willing to take a greatly reduced media rights payout, why would the B1G just sit back and allow the ACC to sail in and plant a flag on the west coast for essentially nothing?

I know both Cal and Stanford don't make the grade on eyeballs, but don't the following factors hold some sway with B1G / FOX?

(1) Bay Area market -- I know, not a college football watching market, but still the 7th or 8th largest TV media market in the country
(2) B1G presidents would love to add Stanford and Berkeley -- both globally recognized as top-10 research universities. Adding Stanford and Berkeley would given the B1G "academic bragging rights" over all other FBS conferences, and would highlight the B1G as the brainier version of the SEC
(3) Stanford has stunk in football for the past 4 years, but prior to that Harbaugh/Shaw had those Cardinal teams averaging 9+ wins per season and went to 3 Rose Bowls in 4 years; there is recent proof that Stanford can compete in football
(4) Would allow for the so-called "West Coast Pod" that would lessen B1G travel expenses; FOX doesn't care about preserving rivalries, but the lower travel has to be a consideration with a 6-team western pod
(5) Ucla would seemingly be in favor if the addition lowered its "Calimony" payments
(6) Notre Dame is the big fish in the longer run; while ND cherishes its independence, in the long game, a truly national B1G with an academic cohort of Stanford, Cal, Northwestern, Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois, et al would be seemingly attractive to Notre Dame
(7) There are absolutely tons of B1G alums living in the Bay Area. Cal and Stanford home attendance would not suffer given the B1G alumni bases out here, and surely some of us nitwits who have been paying for the Pac 12 Network will be willing to shell out $$ to add the B1G sports package instead.

I know TV rules all, but this still amazes me that the B1G wouldn't take a cut-rate deal on Furd and us.

calumnus said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

Seriously where the hell is the B1G? Everyone knew that Oregon State and Washington State were in extreme danger when realignment started. I think most believed that Cal and Stanford would either remain in the Pac, or make the move with Oregon and Washington to the B1G (I'm talking about the general public, not the people on this board).

But at this point Stanford is willing to take $0 to go to the freaking ACC? And the B1G is not involved AT ALL? Like literally, at all?

I had thought that discussions with the ACC were to create a bidding point for the B1G, sort of like Oregon/Washington did with the Big12...but if Stanford is waving around 0 dollars to add them that doesn't really make sense.

The only things that make sense are:

The B1G really REALLY does NOT want Stanford.
Fox really REALLY does NOT want Stanford (even if its free to them and would generate more money for them)
Stanford really REALLY hates the B1G and is trying to stick it to them for killing their conference.

If its the latter, I really hope that they (and Cal) realize that the best way to stick it to the B1G and the teams that left would be to not just join the ACC, but win at a high level, and use the relatively weaker competition to make multiple playoff appearances while Oregon/Washington/UCLA/USC struggle in the B1G.

---

This is Stanford's leverage play. They offered ACC for free to get Fox's attention and now B1G is willing to take them in for free through this media cycle. And now that a price floor has been set, there's no reason for B1G to pay us anything either even if we grovel to join their conference.

---

If so, her rabid defenders were right, Christ has been playing 3-D chess all along.

---

No wonder she has been playing everything so close to her chest! Strategic!

BearSD said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

I had thought that discussions with the ACC were to create a bidding point for the B1G, sort of like Oregon/Washington did with the Big12...but if Stanford is waving around 0 dollars to add them that doesn't really make sense.

---

Not trying to be Mr. Gloom And Doom here, but... it's possible that Stanford was told that the four ACC no votes are hard noes that cannot be changed, and the offer to take zero is a last desperate effort to flip one of those votes to yes.

---

If so, Stanford might have been better off agreeing to give half their share to NC State.

Stanford is clearly looking at Notre Dame and the ACC as their best partners down the road. ESPN is willing to pay the ACC for us. If this doesn't get the necessary 12 votes maybe just get an 8 to 10 school "coalition of the willing" to agree to a scheduling agreement that ESPN would sponsor with a direct payout to the ACC teams that fill out our schedule and we play as the Pac-4 or independent for a year. It could be sold as a "trial run" before everyone commits to a long-term agreement. Also gives us a share of PAC-10 money and privilege before that goes away.

In a vacuum I think this would look bad for Cal, but pretty much all the reporting on this also indicates that Stanford wants to make this deal for themselves AND Cal. Why? Not sure, maybe they just value the rivalry and keeping Cal also a power football program so the Big Game stays meaningful. Maybe they see the logistical advantages to having a travel partner in a far-flung league. Whatever the reason, they seem to be doing it. And thank God they are!

I am also curious why the B1G would not step in and make its own offer. If you can get Stanford and Cal for something greater than zero, why not do it?

BearBoarBlarney said:

---

What continues to boggle my mind is that if the story were true that Stanford is willing to take a greatly reduced media rights payout, why would the B1G just sit back and allow the ACC to sail in and plant a flag on the west coast for essentially nothing?

I know both Cal and Stanford don't make the grade on eyeballs, but don't the following factors hold some sway with B1G / FOX?

(1) Bay Area market -- I know, not a college football watching market, but still the 7th or 8th largest TV media market in the country
(2) B1G presidents would love to add Stanford and Berkeley -- both globally recognized as top-10 research universities. Adding Stanford and Berkeley would given the B1G "academic bragging rights" over all other FBS conferences, and would highlight the B1G as the brainier version of the SEC
(3) Stanford has stunk in football for the past 4 years, but prior to that Harbaugh/Shaw had those Cardinal teams averaging 9+ wins per season and went to 3 Rose Bowls in 4 years; there is recent proof that Stanford can compete in football
(4) Would allow for the so-called "West Coast Pod" that would lessen B1G travel expenses; FOX doesn't care about preserving rivalries, but the lower travel has to be a consideration with a 6-team western pod
(5) Ucla would seemingly be in favor if the addition lowered its "Calimony" payments
(6) Notre Dame is the big fish in the longer run; while ND cherishes its independence, in the long game, a truly national B1G with an academic cohort of Stanford, Cal, Northwestern, Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois, et al would be seemingly attractive to Notre Dame
(7) There are absolutely tons of B1G alums living in the Bay Area. Cal and Stanford home attendance would not suffer given the B1G alumni bases out here, and surely some of us nitwits who have been paying for the Pac 12 Network will be willing to shell out $$ to add the B1G sports package instead.

I know TV rules all, but this still amazes me that the B1G wouldn't take a cut-rate deal on Furd and us.

---

We are developing leverage. Now that we (Stanford and Cal by default) have offered to accept zero from the ACC, we are in a great position to offer to pay the B1G to let us in. We can give them our Calimony payment.

calumnus said:

---

BearSD said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

I had thought that discussions with the ACC were to create a bidding point for the B1G, sort of like Oregon/Washington did with the Big12...but if Stanford is waving around 0 dollars to add them that doesn't really make sense.

---

Not trying to be Mr. Gloom And Doom here, but... it's possible that Stanford was told that the four ACC no votes are hard noes that cannot be changed, and the offer to take zero is a last desperate effort to flip one of those votes to yes.

---

If so, Stanford might have been better off agreeing to give half their share to NC State.

Stanford is clearly looking at Notre Dame and the ACC as their best partners down the road. ESPN is willing to pay the ACC for us. If this doesn't get the necessary 12 votes maybe just get an 8 to 10 school "coalition of the willing" to agree to a scheduling agreement that ESPN would sponsor with a direct payout to the ACC teams that fill out our schedule and we play as the Pac-4 or independent for a year. It could be sold as a "trial run" before everyone commits to a long-term agreement. Also gives us a share of PAC-10 money and privilege before that goes away.

---

Of course, if Stanford (or Cal or SMU) gives back half or all of their revenue share, the entire ACC, not just NC State, decides what to do with the money.

Agreed that a football scheduling agreement is the best interim step if the ACC doesn't offer. That would permit Cal and Stanford to kick the can down the road for a few years in the hope that circumstances become more favorable.

calumnus said:

---

BearBoarBlarney said:

---

What continues to boggle my mind is that if the story were true that Stanford is willing to take a greatly reduced media rights payout, why would the B1G just sit back and allow the ACC to sail in and plant a flag on the west coast for essentially nothing?

I know both Cal and Stanford don't make the grade on eyeballs, but don't the following factors hold some sway with B1G / FOX?

(1) Bay Area market -- I know, not a college football watching market, but still the 7th or 8th largest TV media market in the country
(2) B1G presidents would love to add Stanford and Berkeley -- both globally recognized as top-10 research universities. Adding Stanford and Berkeley would given the B1G "academic bragging rights" over all other FBS conferences, and would highlight the B1G as the brainier version of the SEC
(3) Stanford has stunk in football for the past 4 years, but prior to that Harbaugh/Shaw had those Cardinal teams averaging 9+ wins per season and went to 3 Rose Bowls in 4 years; there is recent proof that Stanford can compete in football
(4) Would allow for the so-called "West Coast Pod" that would lessen B1G travel expenses; FOX doesn't care about preserving rivalries, but the lower travel has to be a consideration with a 6-team western pod
(5) Ucla would seemingly be in favor if the addition lowered its "Calimony" payments
(6) Notre Dame is the big fish in the longer run; while ND cherishes its independence, in the long game, a truly national B1G with an academic cohort of Stanford, Cal, Northwestern, Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois, et al would be seemingly attractive to Notre Dame
(7) There are absolutely tons of B1G alums living in the Bay Area. Cal and Stanford home attendance would not suffer given the B1G alumni bases out here, and surely some of us nitwits who have been paying for the Pac 12 Network will be willing to shell out $$ to add the B1G sports package instead.

I know TV rules all, but this still amazes me that the B1G wouldn't take a cut-rate deal on Furd and us.

---

We are developing leverage. Now that we (Stanford and Cal by default) have offered to accept zero from the ACC, we are in a great position to offer to pay the B1G to let us in. We can give them our Calimony payment.

---

This whole thing is ridiculous. It's like paying someone to take your house from you. I'd rather just sue fox and the big 10 if the alternative is groveling, naked, over hot coals.

bearsandgiants said:

---

calumnus said:

---

BearBoarBlarney said:

---

What continues to boggle my mind is that if the story were true that Stanford is willing to take a greatly reduced media rights payout, why would the B1G just sit back and allow the ACC to sail in and plant a flag on the west coast for essentially nothing?

I know both Cal and Stanford don't make the grade on eyeballs, but don't the following factors hold some sway with B1G / FOX?

(1) Bay Area market -- I know, not a college football watching market, but still the 7th or 8th largest TV media market in the country
(2) B1G presidents would love to add Stanford and Berkeley -- both globally recognized as top-10 research universities. Adding Stanford and Berkeley would given the B1G "academic bragging rights" over all other FBS conferences, and would highlight the B1G as the brainier version of the SEC
(3) Stanford has stunk in football for the past 4 years, but prior to that Harbaugh/Shaw had those Cardinal teams averaging 9+ wins per season and went to 3 Rose Bowls in 4 years; there is recent proof that Stanford can compete in football
(4) Would allow for the so-called "West Coast Pod" that would lessen B1G travel expenses; FOX doesn't care about preserving rivalries, but the lower travel has to be a consideration with a 6-team western pod
(5) Ucla would seemingly be in favor if the addition lowered its "Calimony" payments
(6) Notre Dame is the big fish in the longer run; while ND cherishes its independence, in the long game, a truly national B1G with an academic cohort of Stanford, Cal, Northwestern, Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois, et al would be seemingly attractive to Notre Dame
(7) There are absolutely tons of B1G alums living in the Bay Area. Cal and Stanford home attendance would not suffer given the B1G alumni bases out here, and surely some of us nitwits who have been paying for the Pac 12 Network will be willing to shell out $$ to add the B1G sports package instead.

I know TV rules all, but this still amazes me that the B1G wouldn't take a cut-rate deal on Furd and us.

---

We are developing leverage. Now that we (Stanford and Cal by default) have offered to accept zero from the ACC, we are in a great position to offer to pay the B1G to let us in. We can give them our Calimony payment.

---

This whole thing is ridiculous. It's like paying someone to take your house from you. I'd rather just sue fox and the big 10 if the alternative is groveling, naked, over hot coals.

---

Maybe it's like applying for a job, and after it becomes obvious that the company does not want you at all, you offer to work there for free.

Maybe Drake has had discussions with Regents about the approximate level of $ we'll get from Ucla and we offered to split it with Stanford if we can get into the ACC. I'm just slinging **** against the wall at this point. That's all I've got left.

BearSD said:

---

calumnus said:

---

BearSD said:

---

MrGPAC said:

---

I had thought that discussions with the ACC were to create a bidding point for the B1G, sort of like Oregon/Washington did with the Big12...but if Stanford is waving around 0 dollars to add them that doesn't really make sense.

---

Not trying to be Mr. Gloom And Doom here, but... it's possible that Stanford was told that the four ACC no votes are hard noes that cannot be changed, and the offer to take zero is a last desperate effort to flip one of those votes to yes.

---

If so, Stanford might have been better off agreeing to give half their share to NC State.

Stanford is clearly looking at Notre Dame and the ACC as their best partners down the road. ESPN is willing to pay the ACC for us. If this doesn't get the necessary 12 votes maybe just get an 8 to 10 school "coalition of the willing" to agree to a scheduling agreement that ESPN would sponsor with a direct payout to the ACC teams that fill out our schedule and we play as the Pac-4 or independent for a year. It could be sold as a "trial run" before everyone commits to a long-term agreement. Also gives us a share of PAC-10 money and privilege before that goes away.

---

Of course, if Stanford (or Cal or SMU) gives back half or all of their revenue share, the entire ACC, not just NC State, decides what to do with the money.

Agreed that a football scheduling agreement is the best interim step if the ACC doesn't offer. That would permit Cal and Stanford to kick the can down the road for a few years in the hope that circumstances become more favorable.

---

Right. My only half-serous suggestion is rather than give all the money back to all 14, hoping to flip one of the 4 holdouts, offer to give half the money under the plan that 11 already would vote for to the weakest link of the 4 holdouts to flip them as the 12th vote.

But yes. A trial marriage with the ACC for 2024 could probably get 8 votes and ESPN or Apple support and should be looked at as a fallback option.

This isn't good. Cal does not have the resources to do what Stanford and SMU are proposing. Also indicates what many of us keep saying... Stanford sees Notre Dame as a partner. The Irish really want Stanford in the ACC for a variety of reasons, and Stanford looks ready to do it if they get the votes.

Also don't see this as some Stanford and Cal play like others do. The way this is presented, there was a meeting of the Pac-4 and Stanford informed the other 3 schools of their plans. If Stanford and Cal were tied into each other, Cal and Stanford would be presenting this to the other two.

You don't know that.

you people need to stop believing everything you read. Smells like Oregon State planting a story to muck things up cause they are desperate to hold onto Cal/Furd for "THE NEW PAC12" featuring Panhandle State and NE Oregon A&M. In what universe does Furd do that move for free?

Fire Starkey said:

---

you people need to stop believing everything you read. Smells like Oregon State planting a story to muck things up cause they are desperate to hold onto Cal/Furd for "THE NEW PAC12" featuring Panhandle State and NE Oregon A&M. In what universe does Furd do that move for free?

---

Well it's an Associated Press story. Doesn't mean the AP's sources aren't blowing smoke, but the AP is generally more reliable than some blogger out there no one ever heard of.

JimSox said:

---

Fire Starkey said:

---

you people need to stop believing everything you read. Smells like Oregon State planting a story to muck things up cause they are desperate to hold onto Cal/Furd for "THE NEW PAC12" featuring Panhandle State and NE Oregon A&M. In what universe does Furd do that move for free?

---

Well it's an Associated Press story. Doesn't mean the AP's sources aren't blowing smoke, but the AP is generally more reliable than some blogger out there no one ever heard of.

---

Yup, I was skeptical but if the AP is picking this up there's probably something to it.

Fire Starkey said:

---

you people need to stop believing everything you read. Smells like Oregon State planting a story to muck things up cause they are desperate to hold onto Cal/Furd for "THE NEW PAC12" featuring Panhandle State and NE Oregon A&M. In what universe does Furd do that move for free?

---

Yes. This "leak" is pure crap. Someone trying to derail a train that seems to be pulling out of the station without them on it.