The latest on Conference Realignment and Cal - Saturday the 19th

198,878 Views | 1043 Replies | Last: 1 yr ago by annarborbear
6956bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DoubtfulBear said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

"Having Notre Dame as an ally in this is huge. I will always remember that stood up for us when others were kicking us."

Almost has me forgetting the Immaculate Encroachment call.

And, honestly, I am quite sure there is ND's own self interest standing to gain, somehow. Still, it does make one pause with appreciation for those that stand for one when one is down.

ND wants to keep the ACC from falling apart, so they can remain independent. The fewer conferences there are, the more likely they'll be forced to join one in football. More schools in the ACC guards against that.
I suspected there was something self-serving behind ND's charity.
And the Gang of Four wants the ACC to implode, hence the roadblock.
Welp, two of the best universities in the world have been reduced to pawns in a power struggle.
I most angry at our leadership, which has, by ineptitude, neglect, and/or design, put us in this position.
Yes, though the only schools that REALLY want out of the ACC right now are FSU and Clemson. The NC schools probably are swayable (perhaps already have been swayed and we are just playing out the string).
In all honesty, I can't see how most of the ACC schools could be satisfied with the status quo with over a decade left on a contract that locks them into yesterday's Dollars. Accounting for higher than normal inflation, the ACC contract is like a fixed income with no COLA.
Most of the ACC knows that they could be in trouble if their own conference implodes. FSU and Clemson should be safe enough. UNC and Miami, probably (though not guaranteed). The rest have to be looking over their shoulders. If they add more power schools then they have a decent chance of keeping things together even if two schools leave. That's the thinking here.


What's the urgency of adding us now? They can still do so after FSU and Clemson leave. It's not like we will have a better option anytime in the future.
The fit that Calford provides the ACC other than location is quite good. Most of these schools recruit from a similar talent pool. The non revenue sports in the ACC are good fits for Calford. They can get them now and while they may be able to later getting them now does boost revenues even if only a little.

And while joining is an athletic endeavor primarily the academics that Calford provides is a benefit that the Presidents will likely love to tout.

The security that adding now provides is a help against the constant threats that FSU and Clemson make. But sure the ACC can pass this time and possibly add later.
BearlyCareAnymore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JB was a Chieftain said:

dimitrig said:

Econ141 said:

TheBearWontDie said:

calumnus said:

GoCal80 said:

https://www.si.com/college/georgiatech/football/notre-dame-ad-is-unsure-when-acc-presidents-call-will-be-rescheduled

From the Norte Dame President:

"You can't have two of the great academic institutions in the world not have a place to play. We're working on (a solution). There is still consideration of the ACC as a home for those schools."

"A complete disaster" what's happened in college athletics. "Everybody in the industry has to take responsibility here I'm not excluding myself from that. I think the decision-making lost its way in terms on the focus of the student athlete & what's primarily best for them."


Having Notre Dame as an ally in this is huge. I will always remember that stood up for us when others were kicking us.
They felt remorse for robbing that game from us last year... credit them for standing up for us/LSJU regardless of their motivations. I'll be rooting for them versus FSU I'll tell you that much.


Who's ever think this debacle would make me like both Stanford and Notre Dame more? To be honest - I am voting for Stanford over all other pack 12 teams except Cal obviously. That might change of course after this year.


I am sort of hoping that the former Pac-12 teams win their new conferences. I have always felt that our teams were better than they were given credit for and that the Pac-12 was a really tough league top to bottom. We shall see how true that is.




Nope

I want the 8 schools that left to be bottom feeders in their new conferences! I want UCLA & USC to be embarrassed on National TV on a weekly basis. I want coach prime to go away forever. Arizona & ASU can go back to partying and celebrating their 2 win teams. Oregon & Washington can watch as Oregon St. & Washington St. make the CFP as G5 members. Utah is meh.
What I want is for the whole system to crash and burn and for every school responsible for the ruin of college football and basketball to take a monumental financial bath in the upcoming years and to be honest, that is where I think this is heading. College football and basketball have been crappy on the field/court products compared to the pros for almost a century. You didn't watch because it was the best, much in the same way you didn't watch your high school play or your kids' or other local youth play because they were the best. You watched because games were the culmination of the hard work and training of young people who put on a jersey to proudly represent their community and their teammates by trying their best to play and win a game. That is why it wasn't necessary to have a playoff in football because what mattered was what you did on game day in your community, not what someone 3000 miles away thought of you. The game has been ruined by a bunch of people with money who try to buy success for their own massive egos instead of just enjoying the beauty of sports whether their college's jersey won that day or not. What is going on now is a few participants have lost all sense of proportion and priorities and they will succeed by buying kids who don't give a shyte about the school or their teammates but will (wisely) use the massive egos of those that will fund them to get ahead.

All these teams desperately moving into new conferences are going to fail miserably because that is their role here. Virtually none of them have the priorities (or lack thereof) to compete with a handful of schools in the midwest and southeast who will do anything for this. They are being brought in as fodder for those schools. It is hard to see how battling to be the third or fourth or tenth best in a system you have no chance of beating is going to attract the interest of new fans in these communities. College revenue sports are rapidly becoming a highly regional play that is losing national interest.

College revenue sports, outside of those handful of schools, are a nostalgia play on fumes. They are that restaurant that was special to you when you were young, but their food has long since become crappy and the only thing keeping it going is the sign on the door making people feel like they can still get something they can't. The people with that nostalgia are dying off and they aren't being replaced because what do they really have to offer young people who don't have that nostalgia? Much of the country is already realizing the lack of relevance of the activity. There is no there there.

The best, most spirited college football game I ever saw was in the last game of the year for each team, one team coming in 6-4, the other coming in 5-5. Full house. Loud. Both teams playing their asses off. Paid advertisement at a minimum. No one giving a damn what anyone outside that stadium and the two college communities thought of them. That simply doesn't exist anymore, and pretending like watching Double A football is the same is an exercise many will no longer undertake.
GMP
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's hard to argue with much of what you say, OTB. But I am curious about this sentence:

Quote:

College revenue sports are rapidly becoming a highly regional play that is losing national interest

It seems to me that precisely the opposite is happening: college football used to be regional, but now it is going national, and that is killing off regional interest in all but the upper echelon of programs. And as you continued to make your point, it seems like you would agree with me. So maybe I misunderstood this sentence, as you meant it.
BearlyCareAnymore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DoubtfulBear said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

"Having Notre Dame as an ally in this is huge. I will always remember that stood up for us when others were kicking us."

Almost has me forgetting the Immaculate Encroachment call.

And, honestly, I am quite sure there is ND's own self interest standing to gain, somehow. Still, it does make one pause with appreciation for those that stand for one when one is down.

ND wants to keep the ACC from falling apart, so they can remain independent. The fewer conferences there are, the more likely they'll be forced to join one in football. More schools in the ACC guards against that.
I suspected there was something self-serving behind ND's charity.
And the Gang of Four wants the ACC to implode, hence the roadblock.
Welp, two of the best universities in the world have been reduced to pawns in a power struggle.
I most angry at our leadership, which has, by ineptitude, neglect, and/or design, put us in this position.
Yes, though the only schools that REALLY want out of the ACC right now are FSU and Clemson. The NC schools probably are swayable (perhaps already have been swayed and we are just playing out the string).
In all honesty, I can't see how most of the ACC schools could be satisfied with the status quo with over a decade left on a contract that locks them into yesterday's Dollars. Accounting for higher than normal inflation, the ACC contract is like a fixed income with no COLA.
Most of the ACC knows that they could be in trouble if their own conference implodes. FSU and Clemson should be safe enough. UNC and Miami, probably (though not guaranteed). The rest have to be looking over their shoulders. If they add more power schools then they have a decent chance of keeping things together even if two schools leave. That's the thinking here.


What's the urgency of adding us now? They can still do so after FSU and Clemson leave. It's not like we will have a better option anytime in the future.
If they don't add us now, we won't be worth adding in the future.
berserkeley
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DoubtfulBear said:

berserkeley said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

"Having Notre Dame as an ally in this is huge. I will always remember that stood up for us when others were kicking us."

Almost has me forgetting the Immaculate Encroachment call.

And, honestly, I am quite sure there is ND's own self interest standing to gain, somehow. Still, it does make one pause with appreciation for those that stand for one when one is down.

ND wants to keep the ACC from falling apart, so they can remain independent. The fewer conferences there are, the more likely they'll be forced to join one in football. More schools in the ACC guards against that.
I suspected there was something self-serving behind ND's charity.
And the Gang of Four wants the ACC to implode, hence the roadblock.
Welp, two of the best universities in the world have been reduced to pawns in a power struggle.
I most angry at our leadership, which has, by ineptitude, neglect, and/or design, put us in this position.
Yes, though the only schools that REALLY want out of the ACC right now are FSU and Clemson. The NC schools probably are swayable (perhaps already have been swayed and we are just playing out the string).
In all honesty, I can't see how most of the ACC schools could be satisfied with the status quo with over a decade left on a contract that locks them into yesterday's Dollars. Accounting for higher than normal inflation, the ACC contract is like a fixed income with no COLA.
Most of the ACC knows that they could be in trouble if their own conference implodes. FSU and Clemson should be safe enough. UNC and Miami, probably (though not guaranteed). The rest have to be looking over their shoulders. If they add more power schools then they have a decent chance of keeping things together even if two schools leave. That's the thinking here.


Apparently, the ACC's deal with ESPN allows ESPN to reduce the per team payout if the conference drops below 15 members so adding Calford helps protect the current payouts if FSU and Clemson ever decide to buy their way out.

The exit fee is so high that the ACC will be in a good spot even if ESPN renegotiated


That's not the point. It's not just about having a home; it's about having a home that pays $30M/team rather than being stuck in a home you cannot leave, but where ESPN can arbitrarily decide you are now worth $10M/team.
BearSD
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Bowlesman80 said:

BearSD said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

"Having Notre Dame as an ally in this is huge. I will always remember that stood up for us when others were kicking us."

Almost has me forgetting the Immaculate Encroachment call.

And, honestly, I am quite sure there is ND's own self interest standing to gain, somehow. Still, it does make one pause with appreciation for those that stand for one when one is down.

ND wants to keep the ACC from falling apart, so they can remain independent. The fewer conferences there are, the more likely they'll be forced to join one in football. More schools in the ACC guards against that.
I suspected there was something self-serving behind ND's charity.
And the Gang of Four wants the ACC to implode, hence the roadblock.
Welp, two of the best universities in the world have been reduced to pawns in a power struggle.
I most angry at our leadership, which has, by ineptitude, neglect, and/or design, put us in this position.
Yes, though the only schools that REALLY want out of the ACC right now are FSU and Clemson. The NC schools probably are swayable (perhaps already have been swayed and we are just playing out the string).
In all honesty, I can't see how most of the ACC schools could be satisfied with the status quo with over a decade left on a contract that locks them into yesterday's Dollars. Accounting for higher than normal inflation, the ACC contract is like a fixed income with no COLA.


I can think of something that's worse than a fixed income with no COLA…
Our tentative offer is not much better than SMU's.


It is better than any situation Cal and Stanford will end up in if the ACC doesn't have the votes to make an offer.
Go!Bears
How long do you want to ignore this user?

"They are that restaurant that was special to you when you were young, but their food has long since become crappy and the only thing keeping it going is the sign on the door making people feel like they can still get something they can't"

Blondies…
BearlyCareAnymore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GMP said:

It's hard to argue with much of what you say, OTB. But I am curious about this sentence:

Quote:

College revenue sports are rapidly becoming a highly regional play that is losing national interest

It seems to me that precisely the opposite is happening: college football used to be regional, but now it is going national, and that is killing off regional interest in all but the upper echelon of programs. And as you continued to make your point, it seems like you would agree with me. So maybe I misunderstood this sentence, as you meant it.
Let me clarify. Traditionally college sports were enjoyed and viewed on a regional level, but they were enjoyed pretty much everywhere and at every level. Programs focused on winning their conference and beating their rivals. That was true if you were in the Big 10 or the Ivy League or in Alabama or Idaho. UC Davis vs. Sac State meant something as well as Ohio St. vs. Michigan. Nobody thought small communities that due to size could only bring 5000 to a game were worse than big schools that could bring 100K. The only "national" aspects were bowl games, which were few in number and mostly a reward for winning your conference (did the Big 10 really care that they got beaten by the Pac 8 in the Rosebowl like a million times?) and the rankings which were just fodder for argument.

Then money got involved and took the sport national. It changed the whole complexion. I've seen many fans here desperate to join any big conference state they aren't watching Cal if they are irrelevant (by joining a smaller conference). (Insert comment that we already aren't relevant on a national and we are unlikely to be moreso in a big conference than a little one) That was never the attitude before. Cal-Stanford games sold out when we had barely 5 wins between us and they were ALWAYS relevant to US. And while we would have loved to go into the Big Game with a Rose Bowl on the line, its relevance to others didn't matter. This transformation took place everywhere. You are now only relevant if you can be relevant nationally.

With a handful of schools in a couple of regions having overblown the importance of this activity, it is killing off any interest in the other regions. And it is important to note that while a pro sports team has only one priority, so all pro sports teams are at base on an equal footing, Colleges have many priorities and the differential from one school to another has a huge impact. So it has gone from an activity enjoyed regionally but enjoyed nationwide to an activity that is pretending to be national but is largely becoming enjoyed and financially viable in a narrow set of regions.
DoubtfulBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

DoubtfulBear said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

"Having Notre Dame as an ally in this is huge. I will always remember that stood up for us when others were kicking us."

Almost has me forgetting the Immaculate Encroachment call.

And, honestly, I am quite sure there is ND's own self interest standing to gain, somehow. Still, it does make one pause with appreciation for those that stand for one when one is down.

ND wants to keep the ACC from falling apart, so they can remain independent. The fewer conferences there are, the more likely they'll be forced to join one in football. More schools in the ACC guards against that.
I suspected there was something self-serving behind ND's charity.
And the Gang of Four wants the ACC to implode, hence the roadblock.
Welp, two of the best universities in the world have been reduced to pawns in a power struggle.
I most angry at our leadership, which has, by ineptitude, neglect, and/or design, put us in this position.
Yes, though the only schools that REALLY want out of the ACC right now are FSU and Clemson. The NC schools probably are swayable (perhaps already have been swayed and we are just playing out the string).
In all honesty, I can't see how most of the ACC schools could be satisfied with the status quo with over a decade left on a contract that locks them into yesterday's Dollars. Accounting for higher than normal inflation, the ACC contract is like a fixed income with no COLA.
Most of the ACC knows that they could be in trouble if their own conference implodes. FSU and Clemson should be safe enough. UNC and Miami, probably (though not guaranteed). The rest have to be looking over their shoulders. If they add more power schools then they have a decent chance of keeping things together even if two schools leave. That's the thinking here.


What's the urgency of adding us now? They can still do so after FSU and Clemson leave. It's not like we will have a better option anytime in the future.
It's not clear that Cal and Stanford would be available in the future. Another major conference could snap them up in a year. They might build their own conference out of the best remaining from the AAC and MWC and get locked into a different TV deal. Their athletic departments could implode entirely. They are free agents now.
Then we will get picked up like the 4 G5 schools into Big 12 after O/UT left. No chance we would prefer to stay behind in some hypothetical AAC/MWC hybrid conference. I get you all want to be optimistic but we really don't have much leverage, now or later
golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Econ141 said:



Here we go again. pH level in the Atlantic is slightly above average today so they may have to reschedule.


Beggars cant be choosers, but I kind of actually want SMU to join with us. It provides some presence in Texas, is an hour or two closer via plane, and allows for a mini-pod west of the Mississippi that could easily grow by one if an appropriate school of opportunity becomes available in a few years.
BearlyCareAnymore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearSD said:

Bowlesman80 said:

BearSD said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

"Having Notre Dame as an ally in this is huge. I will always remember that stood up for us when others were kicking us."

Almost has me forgetting the Immaculate Encroachment call.

And, honestly, I am quite sure there is ND's own self interest standing to gain, somehow. Still, it does make one pause with appreciation for those that stand for one when one is down.

ND wants to keep the ACC from falling apart, so they can remain independent. The fewer conferences there are, the more likely they'll be forced to join one in football. More schools in the ACC guards against that.
I suspected there was something self-serving behind ND's charity.
And the Gang of Four wants the ACC to implode, hence the roadblock.
Welp, two of the best universities in the world have been reduced to pawns in a power struggle.
I most angry at our leadership, which has, by ineptitude, neglect, and/or design, put us in this position.
Yes, though the only schools that REALLY want out of the ACC right now are FSU and Clemson. The NC schools probably are swayable (perhaps already have been swayed and we are just playing out the string).
In all honesty, I can't see how most of the ACC schools could be satisfied with the status quo with over a decade left on a contract that locks them into yesterday's Dollars. Accounting for higher than normal inflation, the ACC contract is like a fixed income with no COLA.


I can think of something that's worse than a fixed income with no COLA…
Our tentative offer is not much better than SMU's.


It is better than any situation Cal and Stanford will end up in if the ACC doesn't have the votes to make an offer.
I know some of you don't like to hear this, but it is better for you, but not necessarily better for Cal. There is a price point where cutting funding and playing at a lower level or not playing at all is a financially better deal. I don't claim to know where that price point is, but it is there. Honestly, I think a lot of you would want us to actually pay the ACC to allow us to join.

Additionally, you are entering a situation where everyone else is starting with more money than you, and at least some have more institutional and alumni support, so you are asking a program to compete with a lot fewer resources than their peers.
BearlyCareAnymore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DoubtfulBear said:

sycasey said:

DoubtfulBear said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

"Having Notre Dame as an ally in this is huge. I will always remember that stood up for us when others were kicking us."

Almost has me forgetting the Immaculate Encroachment call.

And, honestly, I am quite sure there is ND's own self interest standing to gain, somehow. Still, it does make one pause with appreciation for those that stand for one when one is down.

ND wants to keep the ACC from falling apart, so they can remain independent. The fewer conferences there are, the more likely they'll be forced to join one in football. More schools in the ACC guards against that.
I suspected there was something self-serving behind ND's charity.
And the Gang of Four wants the ACC to implode, hence the roadblock.
Welp, two of the best universities in the world have been reduced to pawns in a power struggle.
I most angry at our leadership, which has, by ineptitude, neglect, and/or design, put us in this position.
Yes, though the only schools that REALLY want out of the ACC right now are FSU and Clemson. The NC schools probably are swayable (perhaps already have been swayed and we are just playing out the string).
In all honesty, I can't see how most of the ACC schools could be satisfied with the status quo with over a decade left on a contract that locks them into yesterday's Dollars. Accounting for higher than normal inflation, the ACC contract is like a fixed income with no COLA.
Most of the ACC knows that they could be in trouble if their own conference implodes. FSU and Clemson should be safe enough. UNC and Miami, probably (though not guaranteed). The rest have to be looking over their shoulders. If they add more power schools then they have a decent chance of keeping things together even if two schools leave. That's the thinking here.


What's the urgency of adding us now? They can still do so after FSU and Clemson leave. It's not like we will have a better option anytime in the future.
It's not clear that Cal and Stanford would be available in the future. Another major conference could snap them up in a year. They might build their own conference out of the best remaining from the AAC and MWC and get locked into a different TV deal. Their athletic departments could implode entirely. They are free agents now.
Then we will get picked up like the 4 G5 schools into Big 12 after O/UT left. No chance we would prefer to stay behind in some hypothetical AAC/MWC hybrid conference. I get you all want to be optimistic but we really don't much leverage, now or later
That is true, but I think it is now or never. I don't think the ACC would think they could always get us later because our brand would be so damaged as to be no use to them later.
BearlyCareAnymore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Go!Bears said:


"They are that restaurant that was special to you when you were young, but their food has long since become crappy and the only thing keeping it going is the sign on the door making people feel like they can still get something they can't"

Blondies…
That would be:

They are that restaurant that was special to you in college but you realize now their food was always crap but after several beers you didn't notice, but hey, for old time's sake let's have some bad pizza (and several beers still don't hurt).
ColoradoBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearlyCareAnymore said:

Go!Bears said:


"They are that restaurant that was special to you when you were young, but their food has long since become crappy and the only thing keeping it going is the sign on the door making people feel like they can still get something they can't"

Blondies…
That would be:

They are that restaurant that was special to you in college but you realize now their food was always crap but after several beers you didn't notice, but hey, for old time's sake let's have some bad pizza (and several beers still don't hurt).




Always crap?
BearSD
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearlyCareAnymore said:

BearSD said:

Bowlesman80 said:

BearSD said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

"Having Notre Dame as an ally in this is huge. I will always remember that stood up for us when others were kicking us."

Almost has me forgetting the Immaculate Encroachment call.

And, honestly, I am quite sure there is ND's own self interest standing to gain, somehow. Still, it does make one pause with appreciation for those that stand for one when one is down.

ND wants to keep the ACC from falling apart, so they can remain independent. The fewer conferences there are, the more likely they'll be forced to join one in football. More schools in the ACC guards against that.
I suspected there was something self-serving behind ND's charity.
And the Gang of Four wants the ACC to implode, hence the roadblock.
Welp, two of the best universities in the world have been reduced to pawns in a power struggle.
I most angry at our leadership, which has, by ineptitude, neglect, and/or design, put us in this position.
Yes, though the only schools that REALLY want out of the ACC right now are FSU and Clemson. The NC schools probably are swayable (perhaps already have been swayed and we are just playing out the string).
In all honesty, I can't see how most of the ACC schools could be satisfied with the status quo with over a decade left on a contract that locks them into yesterday's Dollars. Accounting for higher than normal inflation, the ACC contract is like a fixed income with no COLA.


I can think of something that's worse than a fixed income with no COLA…
Our tentative offer is not much better than SMU's.


It is better than any situation Cal and Stanford will end up in if the ACC doesn't have the votes to make an offer.
I know some of you don't like to hear this, but it is better for you, but not necessarily better for Cal. There is a price point where cutting funding and playing at a lower level or not playing at all is a financially better deal. I don't claim to know where that price point is, but it is there. Honestly, I think a lot of you would want us to actually pay the ACC to allow us to join.

Additionally, you are entering a situation where everyone else is starting with more money than you, and at least some have more institutional and alumni support, so you are asking a program to compete with a lot fewer resources than their peers.
There is no price point at which playing football at a lower level is better for Cal and Stanford. It's not sustainable in the long term. Donor support would evaporate.
DoubtfulBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearlyCareAnymore said:

DoubtfulBear said:

sycasey said:

DoubtfulBear said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

"Having Notre Dame as an ally in this is huge. I will always remember that stood up for us when others were kicking us."

Almost has me forgetting the Immaculate Encroachment call.

And, honestly, I am quite sure there is ND's own self interest standing to gain, somehow. Still, it does make one pause with appreciation for those that stand for one when one is down.

ND wants to keep the ACC from falling apart, so they can remain independent. The fewer conferences there are, the more likely they'll be forced to join one in football. More schools in the ACC guards against that.
I suspected there was something self-serving behind ND's charity.
And the Gang of Four wants the ACC to implode, hence the roadblock.
Welp, two of the best universities in the world have been reduced to pawns in a power struggle.
I most angry at our leadership, which has, by ineptitude, neglect, and/or design, put us in this position.
Yes, though the only schools that REALLY want out of the ACC right now are FSU and Clemson. The NC schools probably are swayable (perhaps already have been swayed and we are just playing out the string).
In all honesty, I can't see how most of the ACC schools could be satisfied with the status quo with over a decade left on a contract that locks them into yesterday's Dollars. Accounting for higher than normal inflation, the ACC contract is like a fixed income with no COLA.
Most of the ACC knows that they could be in trouble if their own conference implodes. FSU and Clemson should be safe enough. UNC and Miami, probably (though not guaranteed). The rest have to be looking over their shoulders. If they add more power schools then they have a decent chance of keeping things together even if two schools leave. That's the thinking here.


What's the urgency of adding us now? They can still do so after FSU and Clemson leave. It's not like we will have a better option anytime in the future.
It's not clear that Cal and Stanford would be available in the future. Another major conference could snap them up in a year. They might build their own conference out of the best remaining from the AAC and MWC and get locked into a different TV deal. Their athletic departments could implode entirely. They are free agents now.
Then we will get picked up like the 4 G5 schools into Big 12 after O/UT left. No chance we would prefer to stay behind in some hypothetical AAC/MWC hybrid conference. I get you all want to be optimistic but we really don't much leverage, now or later
That is true, but I think it is now or never. I don't think the ACC would think they could always get us later because our brand would be so damaged as to be no use to them later.
Our brand will always be a top academic school. But say you are right, that's even worse for us if SDSU and Fresno State are more attractive brands in 5 years when FSU and Clemson leave. Either way the ACC doesn't lose out by waiting around a few more years.
philly1121
How long do you want to ignore this user?
berserkeley said:

DoubtfulBear said:

berserkeley said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

"Having Notre Dame as an ally in this is huge. I will always remember that stood up for us when others were kicking us."

Almost has me forgetting the Immaculate Encroachment call.

And, honestly, I am quite sure there is ND's own self interest standing to gain, somehow. Still, it does make one pause with appreciation for those that stand for one when one is down.

ND wants to keep the ACC from falling apart, so they can remain independent. The fewer conferences there are, the more likely they'll be forced to join one in football. More schools in the ACC guards against that.
I suspected there was something self-serving behind ND's charity.
And the Gang of Four wants the ACC to implode, hence the roadblock.
Welp, two of the best universities in the world have been reduced to pawns in a power struggle.
I most angry at our leadership, which has, by ineptitude, neglect, and/or design, put us in this position.
Yes, though the only schools that REALLY want out of the ACC right now are FSU and Clemson. The NC schools probably are swayable (perhaps already have been swayed and we are just playing out the string).
In all honesty, I can't see how most of the ACC schools could be satisfied with the status quo with over a decade left on a contract that locks them into yesterday's Dollars. Accounting for higher than normal inflation, the ACC contract is like a fixed income with no COLA.
Most of the ACC knows that they could be in trouble if their own conference implodes. FSU and Clemson should be safe enough. UNC and Miami, probably (though not guaranteed). The rest have to be looking over their shoulders. If they add more power schools then they have a decent chance of keeping things together even if two schools leave. That's the thinking here.


Apparently, the ACC's deal with ESPN allows ESPN to reduce the per team payout if the conference drops below 15 members so adding Calford helps protect the current payouts if FSU and Clemson ever decide to buy their way out.

The exit fee is so high that the ACC will be in a good spot even if ESPN renegotiated


That's not the point. It's not just about having a home; it's about having a home that pays $30M/team rather than being stuck in a home you cannot leave, but where ESPN can arbitrarily decide you are now worth $10M/team.
$30 million? Where did you get that number? Base payout for us in ACC is $8-10 million tops. Its not known if we are part of the performance incentive equation or if we get a payout for increased travel. And we don't know when our base payout will escalate.
concernedparent
How long do you want to ignore this user?
philly1121 said:

berserkeley said:

DoubtfulBear said:

berserkeley said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

"Having Notre Dame as an ally in this is huge. I will always remember that stood up for us when others were kicking us."

Almost has me forgetting the Immaculate Encroachment call.

And, honestly, I am quite sure there is ND's own self interest standing to gain, somehow. Still, it does make one pause with appreciation for those that stand for one when one is down.

ND wants to keep the ACC from falling apart, so they can remain independent. The fewer conferences there are, the more likely they'll be forced to join one in football. More schools in the ACC guards against that.
I suspected there was something self-serving behind ND's charity.
And the Gang of Four wants the ACC to implode, hence the roadblock.
Welp, two of the best universities in the world have been reduced to pawns in a power struggle.
I most angry at our leadership, which has, by ineptitude, neglect, and/or design, put us in this position.
Yes, though the only schools that REALLY want out of the ACC right now are FSU and Clemson. The NC schools probably are swayable (perhaps already have been swayed and we are just playing out the string).
In all honesty, I can't see how most of the ACC schools could be satisfied with the status quo with over a decade left on a contract that locks them into yesterday's Dollars. Accounting for higher than normal inflation, the ACC contract is like a fixed income with no COLA.
Most of the ACC knows that they could be in trouble if their own conference implodes. FSU and Clemson should be safe enough. UNC and Miami, probably (though not guaranteed). The rest have to be looking over their shoulders. If they add more power schools then they have a decent chance of keeping things together even if two schools leave. That's the thinking here.


Apparently, the ACC's deal with ESPN allows ESPN to reduce the per team payout if the conference drops below 15 members so adding Calford helps protect the current payouts if FSU and Clemson ever decide to buy their way out.

The exit fee is so high that the ACC will be in a good spot even if ESPN renegotiated


That's not the point. It's not just about having a home; it's about having a home that pays $30M/team rather than being stuck in a home you cannot leave, but where ESPN can arbitrarily decide you are now worth $10M/team.
$30 million? Where did you get that number? Base payout for us in ACC is $8-10 million tops. Its not known if we are part of the performance incentive equation or if we get a payout for increased travel. And we don't know when our base payout will escalate.
They're talking about for the current ACC members.
ColoradoBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
philly1121 said:

berserkeley said:

DoubtfulBear said:

berserkeley said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

"Having Notre Dame as an ally in this is huge. I will always remember that stood up for us when others were kicking us."

Almost has me forgetting the Immaculate Encroachment call.

And, honestly, I am quite sure there is ND's own self interest standing to gain, somehow. Still, it does make one pause with appreciation for those that stand for one when one is down.

ND wants to keep the ACC from falling apart, so they can remain independent. The fewer conferences there are, the more likely they'll be forced to join one in football. More schools in the ACC guards against that.
I suspected there was something self-serving behind ND's charity.
And the Gang of Four wants the ACC to implode, hence the roadblock.
Welp, two of the best universities in the world have been reduced to pawns in a power struggle.
I most angry at our leadership, which has, by ineptitude, neglect, and/or design, put us in this position.
Yes, though the only schools that REALLY want out of the ACC right now are FSU and Clemson. The NC schools probably are swayable (perhaps already have been swayed and we are just playing out the string).
In all honesty, I can't see how most of the ACC schools could be satisfied with the status quo with over a decade left on a contract that locks them into yesterday's Dollars. Accounting for higher than normal inflation, the ACC contract is like a fixed income with no COLA.
Most of the ACC knows that they could be in trouble if their own conference implodes. FSU and Clemson should be safe enough. UNC and Miami, probably (though not guaranteed). The rest have to be looking over their shoulders. If they add more power schools then they have a decent chance of keeping things together even if two schools leave. That's the thinking here.


Apparently, the ACC's deal with ESPN allows ESPN to reduce the per team payout if the conference drops below 15 members so adding Calford helps protect the current payouts if FSU and Clemson ever decide to buy their way out.

The exit fee is so high that the ACC will be in a good spot even if ESPN renegotiated


That's not the point. It's not just about having a home; it's about having a home that pays $30M/team rather than being stuck in a home you cannot leave, but where ESPN can arbitrarily decide you are now worth $10M/team.
$30 million? Where did you get that number? Base payout for us in ACC is $8-10 million tops. Its not known if we are part of the performance incentive equation or if we get a payout for increased travel. And we don't know when our base payout will escalate.


Could be functuonally $30 million if media is $10 million, playoff/tournament shares are $10 million and Calimony is $10 million. (The ACC paid out $40 million/school with $31 million in media rev, and the 2024 expanded CFB playoff should pay more).
Bobodeluxe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearlyCareAnymore said:

JB was a Chieftain said:

dimitrig said:

Econ141 said:

TheBearWontDie said:

calumnus said:

GoCal80 said:

https://www.si.com/college/georgiatech/football/notre-dame-ad-is-unsure-when-acc-presidents-call-will-be-rescheduled

From the Norte Dame President:

"You can't have two of the great academic institutions in the world not have a place to play. We're working on (a solution). There is still consideration of the ACC as a home for those schools."

"A complete disaster" what's happened in college athletics. "Everybody in the industry has to take responsibility here I'm not excluding myself from that. I think the decision-making lost its way in terms on the focus of the student athlete & what's primarily best for them."


Having Notre Dame as an ally in this is huge. I will always remember that stood up for us when others were kicking us.
They felt remorse for robbing that game from us last year... credit them for standing up for us/LSJU regardless of their motivations. I'll be rooting for them versus FSU I'll tell you that much.


Who's ever think this debacle would make me like both Stanford and Notre Dame more? To be honest - I am voting for Stanford over all other pack 12 teams except Cal obviously. That might change of course after this year.


I am sort of hoping that the former Pac-12 teams win their new conferences. I have always felt that our teams were better than they were given credit for and that the Pac-12 was a really tough league top to bottom. We shall see how true that is.




Nope

I want the 8 schools that left to be bottom feeders in their new conferences! I want UCLA & USC to be embarrassed on National TV on a weekly basis. I want coach prime to go away forever. Arizona & ASU can go back to partying and celebrating their 2 win teams. Oregon & Washington can watch as Oregon St. & Washington St. make the CFP as G5 members. Utah is meh.
What I want is for the whole system to crash and burn and for every school responsible for the ruin of college football and basketball to take a monumental financial bath in the upcoming years and to be honest, that is where I think this is heading. College football and basketball have been crappy on the field/court products compared to the pros for almost a century. You didn't watch because it was the best, much in the same way you didn't watch your high school play or your kids' or other local youth play because they were the best. You watched because games were the culmination of the hard work and training of young people who put on a jersey to proudly represent their community and their teammates by trying their best to play and win a game. That is why it wasn't necessary to have a playoff in football because what mattered was what you did on game day in your community, not what someone 3000 miles away thought of you. The game has been ruined by a bunch of people with money who try to buy success for their own massive egos instead of just enjoying the beauty of sports whether their college's jersey won that day or not. What is going on now is a few participants have lost all sense of proportion and priorities and they will succeed by buying kids who don't give a shyte about the school or their teammates but will (wisely) use the massive egos of those that will fund them to get ahead.

All these teams desperately moving into new conferences are going to fail miserably because that is their role here. Virtually none of them have the priorities (or lack thereof) to compete with a handful of schools in the midwest and southeast who will do anything for this. They are being brought in as fodder for those schools. It is hard to see how battling to be the third or fourth or tenth best in a system you have no chance of beating is going to attract the interest of new fans in these communities. College revenue sports are rapidly becoming a highly regional play that is losing national interest.

College revenue sports, outside of those handful of schools, are a nostalgia play on fumes. They are that restaurant that was special to you when you were young, but their food has long since become crappy and the only thing keeping it going is the sign on the door making people feel like they can still get something they can't. The people with that nostalgia are dying off and they aren't being replaced because what do they really have to offer young people who don't have that nostalgia? Much of the country is already realizing the lack of relevance of the activity. There is no there there.

The best, most spirited college football game I ever saw was in the last game of the year for each team, one team coming in 6-4, the other coming in 5-5. Full house. Loud. Both teams playing their asses off. Paid advertisement at a minimum. No one giving a damn what anyone outside that stadium and the two college communities thought of them. That simply doesn't exist anymore, and pretending like watching Double A football is the same is an exercise many will no longer undertake.
BCA just doesn't feel "Go Laundry!"
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I fully agree with the comments that college sports are losing the regionalism and tradition that made them special and different from pro sports, and it's going to kill the whole thing if they don't put the brakes on it. I don't know how or when that happens; some larger entity needs to be able to regulate the highest level of college football and prevent the massive inequality between conferences we're currently seeing. I can't imagine the fans, as a group, like any of this.
dimitrig
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ColoradoBear said:

BearlyCareAnymore said:

Go!Bears said:


"They are that restaurant that was special to you when you were young, but their food has long since become crappy and the only thing keeping it going is the sign on the door making people feel like they can still get something they can't"

Blondies…
That would be:

They are that restaurant that was special to you in college but you realize now their food was always crap but after several beers you didn't notice, but hey, for old time's sake let's have some bad pizza (and several beers still don't hurt).




Always crap?

Remember when we had cheerleaders?





sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GMP said:

It's hard to argue with much of what you say, OTB. But I am curious about this sentence:

Quote:

College revenue sports are rapidly becoming a highly regional play that is losing national interest

It seems to me that precisely the opposite is happening: college football used to be regional, but now it is going national, and that is killing off regional interest in all but the upper echelon of programs. And as you continued to make your point, it seems like you would agree with me. So maybe I misunderstood this sentence, as you meant it.
Not speaking for OTB/BearlyCare, but here's how I would look at it:

The powers that be (TV networks, mostly) THINK that they can make college football a purely national sport. They think it can be NFL Lite. But it's not that and was never that, it was a conglomeration of regional schools and leagues that all formed a broader national ecosystem that could be called "college football." People rooted for teams because they went to that school or because it was the school near where they grew up, not because they wanted to see "the best" of the sport. The attempt to nationalize is likely going to fail at some point; the TV money gravy train is going to stop, and then we'll see where everyone winds up. I think most will not be all that happy.

Some blame the attempts to crown a national champion, and maybe that's part of it . . . but I think there is a way to balance that and still maintain the fun quirky regionalism that used to define college sports. That's the way the NCAA runs just about every other sport: think March Madness. It crowns a national champion in basketball, but all the conferences get to participate and there are multiple routes to getting in. Everyone feels like they have a stake in the process, which then filters down to the smaller goals of winning your conference and then going for higher seeds and advancing further that will keep the local fans engaged. It works and doesn't necessarily blow up the conferences.

Football has gone about it in entirely the wrong way: first you had to win an arbitrary poll, then try to be in the top two of that arbitrary poll, then the top four. That leaves way too many schools out and feeling like they have no stake in it. It encourages competition between conferences for the most TV money, which then leads to poaching. We're seeing the endgame of that approach now. I think they key difference here is that there was no NCAA regulating it; the top level of college football was a free-for-all for a long time. I think at some point soon even the big dogs will be begging for someone to regulate them.

As far as Cal is concerned, I don't love the ACC deal or that we'd have to take a pay cut to do it. But I do care about keeping the program afloat so we still have a team to watch until such time as everyone comes to their senses, so based on that it's a necessary evil.
BearlyCareAnymore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ColoradoBear said:

BearlyCareAnymore said:

Go!Bears said:


"They are that restaurant that was special to you when you were young, but their food has long since become crappy and the only thing keeping it going is the sign on the door making people feel like they can still get something they can't"

Blondies…
That would be:

They are that restaurant that was special to you in college but you realize now their food was always crap but after several beers you didn't notice, but hey, for old time's sake let's have some bad pizza (and several beers still don't hurt).




Always crap?


That was in reference to Blondies, not college football
berserkeley
How long do you want to ignore this user?
philly1121 said:

berserkeley said:

DoubtfulBear said:

berserkeley said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

"Having Notre Dame as an ally in this is huge. I will always remember that stood up for us when others were kicking us."

Almost has me forgetting the Immaculate Encroachment call.

And, honestly, I am quite sure there is ND's own self interest standing to gain, somehow. Still, it does make one pause with appreciation for those that stand for one when one is down.

ND wants to keep the ACC from falling apart, so they can remain independent. The fewer conferences there are, the more likely they'll be forced to join one in football. More schools in the ACC guards against that.
I suspected there was something self-serving behind ND's charity.
And the Gang of Four wants the ACC to implode, hence the roadblock.
Welp, two of the best universities in the world have been reduced to pawns in a power struggle.
I most angry at our leadership, which has, by ineptitude, neglect, and/or design, put us in this position.
Yes, though the only schools that REALLY want out of the ACC right now are FSU and Clemson. The NC schools probably are swayable (perhaps already have been swayed and we are just playing out the string).
In all honesty, I can't see how most of the ACC schools could be satisfied with the status quo with over a decade left on a contract that locks them into yesterday's Dollars. Accounting for higher than normal inflation, the ACC contract is like a fixed income with no COLA.
Most of the ACC knows that they could be in trouble if their own conference implodes. FSU and Clemson should be safe enough. UNC and Miami, probably (though not guaranteed). The rest have to be looking over their shoulders. If they add more power schools then they have a decent chance of keeping things together even if two schools leave. That's the thinking here.


Apparently, the ACC's deal with ESPN allows ESPN to reduce the per team payout if the conference drops below 15 members so adding Calford helps protect the current payouts if FSU and Clemson ever decide to buy their way out.

The exit fee is so high that the ACC will be in a good spot even if ESPN renegotiated


That's not the point. It's not just about having a home; it's about having a home that pays $30M/team rather than being stuck in a home you cannot leave, but where ESPN can arbitrarily decide you are now worth $10M/team.
$30 million? Where did you get that number? Base payout for us in ACC is $8-10 million tops. Its not known if we are part of the performance incentive equation or if we get a payout for increased travel. And we don't know when our base payout will escalate.


I am speaking about the current teams in the ACC.

If the ACC does not add Calford and FSU and Clemson buy their way out and the rest are still bound by the GOR, ESPN can unilaterally reduce the payout per team.

Part of the reason the ACC teams want to add Calford is to keep the # of teams in the ACC at 15 even if FSU and Clemson leave. As long as they do, ESPN cannot reduce their per team payout.
BearSD
How long do you want to ignore this user?

Quote:

"That's the way the NCAA runs just about every other sport: think March Madness. It crowns a national champion in basketball, but all the conferences get to participate and there are multiple routes to getting in."
College basketball is not a good example. 90% of the fans care only about March Madness, maybe a little about the small-school conference tournament finals hyped by ESPN, and nothing about the regular season that proceeds it.
BearlyCareAnymore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DoubtfulBear said:

BearlyCareAnymore said:

DoubtfulBear said:

sycasey said:

DoubtfulBear said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

"Having Notre Dame as an ally in this is huge. I will always remember that stood up for us when others were kicking us."

Almost has me forgetting the Immaculate Encroachment call.

And, honestly, I am quite sure there is ND's own self interest standing to gain, somehow. Still, it does make one pause with appreciation for those that stand for one when one is down.

ND wants to keep the ACC from falling apart, so they can remain independent. The fewer conferences there are, the more likely they'll be forced to join one in football. More schools in the ACC guards against that.
I suspected there was something self-serving behind ND's charity.
And the Gang of Four wants the ACC to implode, hence the roadblock.
Welp, two of the best universities in the world have been reduced to pawns in a power struggle.
I most angry at our leadership, which has, by ineptitude, neglect, and/or design, put us in this position.
Yes, though the only schools that REALLY want out of the ACC right now are FSU and Clemson. The NC schools probably are swayable (perhaps already have been swayed and we are just playing out the string).
In all honesty, I can't see how most of the ACC schools could be satisfied with the status quo with over a decade left on a contract that locks them into yesterday's Dollars. Accounting for higher than normal inflation, the ACC contract is like a fixed income with no COLA.
Most of the ACC knows that they could be in trouble if their own conference implodes. FSU and Clemson should be safe enough. UNC and Miami, probably (though not guaranteed). The rest have to be looking over their shoulders. If they add more power schools then they have a decent chance of keeping things together even if two schools leave. That's the thinking here.


What's the urgency of adding us now? They can still do so after FSU and Clemson leave. It's not like we will have a better option anytime in the future.
It's not clear that Cal and Stanford would be available in the future. Another major conference could snap them up in a year. They might build their own conference out of the best remaining from the AAC and MWC and get locked into a different TV deal. Their athletic departments could implode entirely. They are free agents now.
Then we will get picked up like the 4 G5 schools into Big 12 after O/UT left. No chance we would prefer to stay behind in some hypothetical AAC/MWC hybrid conference. I get you all want to be optimistic but we really don't much leverage, now or later
That is true, but I think it is now or never. I don't think the ACC would think they could always get us later because our brand would be so damaged as to be no use to them later.
Our brand will always be a top academic school. But say you are right, that's even worse for us if SDSU and Fresno State are more attractive brands in 5 years when FSU and Clemson leave. Either way the ACC doesn't lose out by waiting around a few more years.


I would argue that SDSU, FSU, or Cal after a couple years of being outside a major conference are all of no use to the ACC

They want a conference of perceived major conference teams.
DoubtfulBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearlyCareAnymore said:

DoubtfulBear said:

BearlyCareAnymore said:

DoubtfulBear said:

sycasey said:

DoubtfulBear said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

"Having Notre Dame as an ally in this is huge. I will always remember that stood up for us when others were kicking us."

Almost has me forgetting the Immaculate Encroachment call.

And, honestly, I am quite sure there is ND's own self interest standing to gain, somehow. Still, it does make one pause with appreciation for those that stand for one when one is down.

ND wants to keep the ACC from falling apart, so they can remain independent. The fewer conferences there are, the more likely they'll be forced to join one in football. More schools in the ACC guards against that.
I suspected there was something self-serving behind ND's charity.
And the Gang of Four wants the ACC to implode, hence the roadblock.
Welp, two of the best universities in the world have been reduced to pawns in a power struggle.
I most angry at our leadership, which has, by ineptitude, neglect, and/or design, put us in this position.
Yes, though the only schools that REALLY want out of the ACC right now are FSU and Clemson. The NC schools probably are swayable (perhaps already have been swayed and we are just playing out the string).
In all honesty, I can't see how most of the ACC schools could be satisfied with the status quo with over a decade left on a contract that locks them into yesterday's Dollars. Accounting for higher than normal inflation, the ACC contract is like a fixed income with no COLA.
Most of the ACC knows that they could be in trouble if their own conference implodes. FSU and Clemson should be safe enough. UNC and Miami, probably (though not guaranteed). The rest have to be looking over their shoulders. If they add more power schools then they have a decent chance of keeping things together even if two schools leave. That's the thinking here.


What's the urgency of adding us now? They can still do so after FSU and Clemson leave. It's not like we will have a better option anytime in the future.
It's not clear that Cal and Stanford would be available in the future. Another major conference could snap them up in a year. They might build their own conference out of the best remaining from the AAC and MWC and get locked into a different TV deal. Their athletic departments could implode entirely. They are free agents now.
Then we will get picked up like the 4 G5 schools into Big 12 after O/UT left. No chance we would prefer to stay behind in some hypothetical AAC/MWC hybrid conference. I get you all want to be optimistic but we really don't much leverage, now or later
That is true, but I think it is now or never. I don't think the ACC would think they could always get us later because our brand would be so damaged as to be no use to them later.
Our brand will always be a top academic school. But say you are right, that's even worse for us if SDSU and Fresno State are more attractive brands in 5 years when FSU and Clemson leave. Either way the ACC doesn't lose out by waiting around a few more years.


I would argue that SDSU, FSU, or Cal after a couple years of being outside a major conference are all of no use to the ACC

They want a conference of perceived major conference teams.
That's clearly false considering how relevant Cincinnati, Houston, UCF and BYU have been despite being stuck in G5
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearSD said:


Quote:

"That's the way the NCAA runs just about every other sport: think March Madness. It crowns a national champion in basketball, but all the conferences get to participate and there are multiple routes to getting in."
College basketball is not a good example. 90% of the fans care only about March Madness, maybe a little about the small-school conference tournament finals hyped by ESPN, and nothing about the regular season that proceeds it.
In the national media and among casual fans, yes. But the fans and supporters of individual teams can still enjoy their seasons and the smaller goals that go along with it, while hoping to build to something bigger. The point is that the pathway remains there.
Bowlesman80
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

I fully agree with the comments that college sports are losing the regionalism and tradition that made them special and different from pro sports, and it's going to kill the whole thing if they don't put the brakes on it. I don't know how or when that happens; some larger entity needs to be able to regulate the highest level of college football and prevent the massive inequality between conferences we're currently seeing. I can't imagine the fans, as a group, like any of this.
NCAA salary/expenditure caps should be implemented over the next 10-15 years. When is the NFL going to make its own minor leagues, such as MLB?
"Just win, baby."
Bowlesman80
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"BCA just doesn't feel "Go Laundry!""

*checks urban dictionary....checks football jargon dictionary....???
"Just win, baby."
BearlyCareAnymore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearSD said:

BearlyCareAnymore said:

BearSD said:

Bowlesman80 said:

BearSD said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

"Having Notre Dame as an ally in this is huge. I will always remember that stood up for us when others were kicking us."

Almost has me forgetting the Immaculate Encroachment call.

And, honestly, I am quite sure there is ND's own self interest standing to gain, somehow. Still, it does make one pause with appreciation for those that stand for one when one is down.

ND wants to keep the ACC from falling apart, so they can remain independent. The fewer conferences there are, the more likely they'll be forced to join one in football. More schools in the ACC guards against that.
I suspected there was something self-serving behind ND's charity.
And the Gang of Four wants the ACC to implode, hence the roadblock.
Welp, two of the best universities in the world have been reduced to pawns in a power struggle.
I most angry at our leadership, which has, by ineptitude, neglect, and/or design, put us in this position.
Yes, though the only schools that REALLY want out of the ACC right now are FSU and Clemson. The NC schools probably are swayable (perhaps already have been swayed and we are just playing out the string).
In all honesty, I can't see how most of the ACC schools could be satisfied with the status quo with over a decade left on a contract that locks them into yesterday's Dollars. Accounting for higher than normal inflation, the ACC contract is like a fixed income with no COLA.


I can think of something that's worse than a fixed income with no COLA…
Our tentative offer is not much better than SMU's.


It is better than any situation Cal and Stanford will end up in if the ACC doesn't have the votes to make an offer.
I know some of you don't like to hear this, but it is better for you, but not necessarily better for Cal. There is a price point where cutting funding and playing at a lower level or not playing at all is a financially better deal. I don't claim to know where that price point is, but it is there. Honestly, I think a lot of you would want us to actually pay the ACC to allow us to join.

Additionally, you are entering a situation where everyone else is starting with more money than you, and at least some have more institutional and alumni support, so you are asking a program to compete with a lot fewer resources than their peers.
There is no price point at which playing football at a lower level is better for Cal and Stanford. It's not sustainable in the long term. Donor support would evaporate.


There has been purported insider information that agrees with you that playing at a lower level is not sustainable and the option at that point is shutting down. Don't know if that is true or not, but that only means that the price point equation is play or don't. It is also not sustainable to play with little conference money. Football is expensive and there is a point where what the ACC offers would be too low. Unless donors come through in a way they have not prior, we can't run a major conference program only on donations
BearlyCareAnymore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DoubtfulBear said:

BearlyCareAnymore said:

DoubtfulBear said:

BearlyCareAnymore said:

DoubtfulBear said:

sycasey said:

DoubtfulBear said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

"Having Notre Dame as an ally in this is huge. I will always remember that stood up for us when others were kicking us."

Almost has me forgetting the Immaculate Encroachment call.

And, honestly, I am quite sure there is ND's own self interest standing to gain, somehow. Still, it does make one pause with appreciation for those that stand for one when one is down.

ND wants to keep the ACC from falling apart, so they can remain independent. The fewer conferences there are, the more likely they'll be forced to join one in football. More schools in the ACC guards against that.
I suspected there was something self-serving behind ND's charity.
And the Gang of Four wants the ACC to implode, hence the roadblock.
Welp, two of the best universities in the world have been reduced to pawns in a power struggle.
I most angry at our leadership, which has, by ineptitude, neglect, and/or design, put us in this position.
Yes, though the only schools that REALLY want out of the ACC right now are FSU and Clemson. The NC schools probably are swayable (perhaps already have been swayed and we are just playing out the string).
In all honesty, I can't see how most of the ACC schools could be satisfied with the status quo with over a decade left on a contract that locks them into yesterday's Dollars. Accounting for higher than normal inflation, the ACC contract is like a fixed income with no COLA.
Most of the ACC knows that they could be in trouble if their own conference implodes. FSU and Clemson should be safe enough. UNC and Miami, probably (though not guaranteed). The rest have to be looking over their shoulders. If they add more power schools then they have a decent chance of keeping things together even if two schools leave. That's the thinking here.


What's the urgency of adding us now? They can still do so after FSU and Clemson leave. It's not like we will have a better option anytime in the future.
It's not clear that Cal and Stanford would be available in the future. Another major conference could snap them up in a year. They might build their own conference out of the best remaining from the AAC and MWC and get locked into a different TV deal. Their athletic departments could implode entirely. They are free agents now.
Then we will get picked up like the 4 G5 schools into Big 12 after O/UT left. No chance we would prefer to stay behind in some hypothetical AAC/MWC hybrid conference. I get you all want to be optimistic but we really don't much leverage, now or later
That is true, but I think it is now or never. I don't think the ACC would think they could always get us later because our brand would be so damaged as to be no use to them later.
Our brand will always be a top academic school. But say you are right, that's even worse for us if SDSU and Fresno State are more attractive brands in 5 years when FSU and Clemson leave. Either way the ACC doesn't lose out by waiting around a few more years.


I would argue that SDSU, FSU, or Cal after a couple years of being outside a major conference are all of no use to the ACC

They want a conference of perceived major conference teams.
That's clearly false considering how relevant Cincinnati, Houston, UCF and BYU have been despite being stuck in G5


Just because it is possible for someone to be relevant does not mean it is likely. I don't see that if Clemson and FSU leave, or worse, more, that adding Fresno and SDSU would add any value to the ACC. And Cal could surprise me, but my guess is that wherever we go we will be just good enough to suck and that will remain true if we drop down.

BearSD
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearlyCareAnymore said:

BearSD said:

BearlyCareAnymore said:

BearSD said:

Bowlesman80 said:

BearSD said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

sycasey said:

Bowlesman80 said:

"Having Notre Dame as an ally in this is huge. I will always remember that stood up for us when others were kicking us."

Almost has me forgetting the Immaculate Encroachment call.

And, honestly, I am quite sure there is ND's own self interest standing to gain, somehow. Still, it does make one pause with appreciation for those that stand for one when one is down.

ND wants to keep the ACC from falling apart, so they can remain independent. The fewer conferences there are, the more likely they'll be forced to join one in football. More schools in the ACC guards against that.
I suspected there was something self-serving behind ND's charity.
And the Gang of Four wants the ACC to implode, hence the roadblock.
Welp, two of the best universities in the world have been reduced to pawns in a power struggle.
I most angry at our leadership, which has, by ineptitude, neglect, and/or design, put us in this position.
Yes, though the only schools that REALLY want out of the ACC right now are FSU and Clemson. The NC schools probably are swayable (perhaps already have been swayed and we are just playing out the string).
In all honesty, I can't see how most of the ACC schools could be satisfied with the status quo with over a decade left on a contract that locks them into yesterday's Dollars. Accounting for higher than normal inflation, the ACC contract is like a fixed income with no COLA.


I can think of something that's worse than a fixed income with no COLA…
Our tentative offer is not much better than SMU's.


It is better than any situation Cal and Stanford will end up in if the ACC doesn't have the votes to make an offer.
I know some of you don't like to hear this, but it is better for you, but not necessarily better for Cal. There is a price point where cutting funding and playing at a lower level or not playing at all is a financially better deal. I don't claim to know where that price point is, but it is there. Honestly, I think a lot of you would want us to actually pay the ACC to allow us to join.

Additionally, you are entering a situation where everyone else is starting with more money than you, and at least some have more institutional and alumni support, so you are asking a program to compete with a lot fewer resources than their peers.
There is no price point at which playing football at a lower level is better for Cal and Stanford. It's not sustainable in the long term. Donor support would evaporate.

There has been purported insider information that agrees with you that playing at a lower level is not sustainable and the option at that point is shutting down. Don't know if that is true or not, but that only means that the price point equation is play or don't. It is also not sustainable to play with little conference money. Football is expensive and there is a point where what the ACC offers would be too low. Unless donors come through in a way they have not prior, we can't run a major conference program only on donations

To be clear, the assessment about lower-level football applies only to football. Even if football was discontinued, it's likely that other sports would continue in Division I, as they do at schools like UC Santa Barbara.

As for ACC revenue being low: The reduced shares of ACC revenue for Cal and Stanford would be only in the short term. The rumor/report is that donors would step up in that short term period if Cal is in the ACC, and that the elevated level of donations would drop off as ACC distributions to Cal increase.
GMP
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I posted this before, but it bears re-posting: The Ringer's Rodger Sherman wrote about the Pac-12 collapse and I thought it was a really apt way of thinking about it, and your point about turning college football into NFL lite reminded me of it:

Quote:

Evolution turns everything into crabs. For whatever reason, a handful of unrelated crustacean species all wound up looking exactly the same, because flat and pinchy is apparently the optimal body structure for survival. The same has happened with North American pro sports even though every league was founded under entirely different circumstances, in different regions of the country, across different eras with different business models. The NFL was founded in midsize Rust Belt cities with hopes of leeching off the massive popularity of college football; the American and National Leagues used to be competitors, with their own commissioners and rules; the Stanley Cup was originally given out to amateur Canadian clubs who had to challenge one another for the title. Now these leagues are essentially all the same with 30 to 32 teams, spread across the continent, playing in most of the same cities. Same with the NBA, and MLS, all having evolved into the same pro sports crab.
Next up is college football, a sport built on the strength of regional rivalries which is now rapidly evolving into a national sport with just a few massive coast-to-coast conferences. Unfortunately, the Pac-12 will not be one of the lucky crustaceans. The 108-year-old regional league is doomed to die after losing most of its marquee members to the formerly Midwestern Big Ten now up to 18 teams, spread coast-to-coast.



Conference realignment is not new. Teams have been switching leagues for decades. But this latest round is exceptionally bleak. Historically, the most important thing about college athletic conferences was their geography. Part of this was about convenience: It's easier to schedule games against the team down the road. But it also fostered the environment that made college sports special. It's about road-tripping to watch your squad play and having neighbors or coworkers or in-laws who root for That Other Team in your state and will spend 364 days telling you about it if your team loses that one rivalry game every year.


Pro sports, on the other hand, are inherently national, not regional. It is rare for cities to have two teams in the same league. A crosstown rivalry is nice, and might even be feasible in metropoles like New York or Los Angeles. But everywhere else, it's a bad strategy. Why split one city's fans between two teams when you could spread out into new territories? Although there are geographic rivalries in pro sports, they're less personal. A Yankees fan in New York doesn't have to see Red Sox fans most days. It's a hate you bust out a few times a year, instead of the simmering hate that powers college athletics.

The Pac-12 was a regional league. It was named after a region, and basically every team in the league had a clear and obvious rival. USC and UCLA played in the most aesthetically pleasing game of the year, red-and-gold against powder blue in the Rose Bowl or the Coliseum. Stanford and Cal played in the Big Game, a contest matching up some of the greatest, and nerdiest, players in football history. Oregon and Oregon State played for the perfect Platypus Trophy half-Duck, half-Beaver, get it? The Apple Cup between Washington and Wazzu always seemed drunk, and Arizona and Arizona State waged football war in the desert.

The Oregon-Washington move to the Big Ten permanently kills two of those iconic rivalriesOregon and Washington are leaving behind their natural rivalsand relegates Cal-Stanford to third-tier status in a left-behind league. It follows a trend, as by joining the SEC, Oklahoma is leaving Oklahoma State behind in the Big 12, killing off a game so chaotic it earned the nickname "Bedlam."

In doing so, these teams that are leaving for bigger leagues or more TV money are permanently winning their rivalries, officially announcing themselves as bigger and better than the teams they share a state with. They will crowd out their ex-rivals, soaking up resources and talent and fans. Their pockets will be richer and their experience will be poorer: Instead of bragging about beating their rivals from down the road, they will play schools from the other side of the country and have nobody to talk to about it.


People bemoaning the modern state of college athletics (including many of the people who actively run universities, conferences, or the NCAA) have repeatedly harped on the growing professionalization of college athletics and when they say this, they're talking about how college athletes can now switch schools with more ease through the transfer portal or receive money for appearing in commercials. But the thing about college sports which reminds me most of the pros is the way the most powerful schools and conferences have reshaped the sport. The Big Ten and the SEC are locked in a battle to become the Junior NFL, they know the form they need to take, and they are clearly putting in the steps to get there. Evolution turns everything into crabs, and it's shaped every pro league into the same creature. The Pac-12 is one of the species that didn't survive.





https://www.theringer.com/college-football/2023/8/4/23820686/death-of-pac-12-conference-realignment-college-football-oregon-washington-big-ten
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.