not just one account from West Virginia reporting it, SF Chronicle is too. Big12 appears to be a backup.
The latest on Conference Realignment and Cal - Saturday the 19th
207,450 Views |
1043 Replies |
Last: 1 yr ago by annarborbear
All the sources still say they expect them to join the ACC
Dennis Dodd put out a realignment update an hour ago on cbs sports dot com…
"As of Saturday morning, no meeting of ACC presidents has been called. However, one source involved in the process told CBS Sports that ACC expansion "is trending very strongly" for Cal and Stanford."
"As of Saturday morning, no meeting of ACC presidents has been called. However, one source involved in the process told CBS Sports that ACC expansion "is trending very strongly" for Cal and Stanford."
Which conference would you want Cal and Stanford in?
— Jacob Lee (@CAL_SPORTS_) August 26, 2023
With payouts being equal I'd rather play in the Big-12 and include the other Pac-4 schools.
Was referring to MHVer's statement that the ACC vote seemed unlikely; not the B12 back-up news
BearHunter said:Which conference would you want Cal and Stanford in?
— Jacob Lee (@CAL_SPORTS_) August 26, 2023
With payouts being equal I'd rather play in the Big-12 and include the other Pac-4 schools.
Emotionally I'd prefer the ACC. Just sounds new and interesting. Plus intriguing basketball matchups. Practically speaking, the Big XII is better isn't it? Shorter travel. Keep 7 of the current 11 PAC opponents. More money if I'm reading this correctly. And you don't leave OSU and WSU out in the cold.
But mostly either one. And SOON!
He said a vote was canceled last night. But they won't schedule one unless the vote is unanimous. Trying to make everyone happy. Trying to hammer out the details. And MHver isn't a reliable source.
I don't believe there was ever a vote scheduled from last night lol. An AP story from 2:22pm on Friday said no call was scheduled and that they were discussing details of how to divvy up money.
baytobreakers said:
Was referring to MHVer's statement that the ACC vote seemed unlikely; not the B12 back-up news
He said that he still thinks Calford to the ACC is likely, just that becomes less likely the longer it drags on? Not sure if that last part is really true anyway.
JimSox said:BearHunter said:Which conference would you want Cal and Stanford in?
— Jacob Lee (@CAL_SPORTS_) August 26, 2023
With payouts being equal I'd rather play in the Big-12 and include the other Pac-4 schools.
Emotionally I'd prefer the ACC. Just sounds new and interesting. Plus intriguing basketball matchups. Practically speaking, the Big XII is better isn't it? Shorter travel. Keep 7 of the current 11 PAC opponents. More money if I'm reading this correctly. And you don't leave OSU and WSU out in the cold.
But mostly either one. And SOON!
I'm pretty sure the B-12 would only be more money initially and that assumes Fox kicks in their portion for the Pac-4. The other advantages would hold.
Moreover, with the former PAC-8 you have a regional pod, especially for the non-revenue sports. Further B-12 expansion could include San Diego State, UNLV, Fresno or Hawaii.
Like you, I prefer ACC, I feel like there is more upside there, more joy, but the B-12 has some logic. However, if Fox is willing to pay $64 million (their half) for the PAC-4 to go to the B-12, why not pay that for Calford to the B1G?
91Cal said:There have been many, many reports from "disparate" reporters that Calford are going to be admitted stating that the details of payment/distribution are being hammered out.6956bear said:Seems clear they do not have 12 votes. I think that there may be other no votes. Miami could be a no. I just do not think you will get 12 votes if that requires giving extra money to Clemson and FSU upfront.berserkeley said:
Maybe they're trying to find a way that would keep FSU and Clemson from trying to leave before 2030.
But ...
It's been, what, 8 or 9 days since we flipped two votes from "no" to "maybe"? And they still haven't cast a vote. And it's been how many days now that they've allegedly been debating how to split the money?
It sounds like we don't have 12 "yes" votes. It sounds like the ACC has to find a way to split the money that gets UNC and NCSU to vote yes without losing any of the current support and they haven't found a way to do that yet. Or that they have to find a way to split the money that makes all 15 happy because they only reason to vote to expand is to keep FSU and Clemson in the fold.
There is a reason that ESPN has supposedly begun to lobby Yormark to let Calford into the Big 12. What would be interesting is if Fox would kick in to make Calford equal to the 4 corner schools. My guess is no.
This will be the first conference setting up a performance fund/unbalanced payments so am guessing that these related nuances are the long pole in the tent. How much of the "donated" amount is set aside for the performance v. how much is distributed to the existing members. How much are the new teams eligible to receive. How much distributed to the existing members for travel costs and for what sports. How much additional $$ is there with the addition of the NorCal and Dallas markets.
The have the votes, but are looking to get to unanimous.
As many have written, does Fox and the big 18, but more importantly, Fox come back with a last minute offer for Calford similar to their last second offer for the Duskies.
No it's not. The MWC set it up and it became a problem. The terms of it are critical.
Cal and Stanford are not Big 12 teams, imo
More than a third of the new Big -12 would be former Pac-12 schools.
While Cal may be open to the Big12, I don't think Stanford really wants to go there, and whatever Stanford does, cal will do.
Maybe we need a new rival?
I would think OSU/WSU would only get a partial share like Cincy, Houston & UCF.calumnus said:
However, if Fox is willing to pay $64 million (their half) for the PAC-4 to go to the B-12, why not pay that for Calford to the B1G?
In 5 years I could see Stanford going to the B1G with Notre Dame. Think about it.JRL.02 said:
While Cal may be open to the Big12, I don't think Stanford really wants to go there, and whatever Stanford does, cal will do.
JimSox said:BearHunter said:Which conference would you want Cal and Stanford in?
— Jacob Lee (@CAL_SPORTS_) August 26, 2023
With payouts being equal I'd rather play in the Big-12 and include the other Pac-4 schools.
Emotionally I'd prefer the ACC. Just sounds new and interesting. Plus intriguing basketball matchups. Practically speaking, the Big XII is better isn't it? Shorter travel. Keep 7 of the current 11 PAC opponents. More money if I'm reading this correctly. And you don't leave OSU and WSU out in the cold.
But mostly either one. And SOON!
ACC is better because east coast bias is real, and playing so many games on the east coast in east coast cities and in east coast time slots would be a big benefit to Cal teams.
Obviously either is better than being left out with only $5 million/year.
If they sign the ACC's GOR and if their football product has not improved, they will be staying put in the ACC
Also: the ACC's contract with Notre Dame gives the ACC right of first refusal if ND decided to join a conference… them going to the Big Ten is not as simple as just applying for Big Ten membership
Also: the ACC's contract with Notre Dame gives the ACC right of first refusal if ND decided to join a conference… them going to the Big Ten is not as simple as just applying for Big Ten membership
Yes the ACC will remain relevent as long as ND remains there even as a partial member. No question. The problem is if they ever do move.Piratefan2102 said:
If they sign the ACC's GOR and if their football product has not improved, they will be staying put in the ACC
Also: the ACC's contract with Notre Dame gives the ACC right of first refusal if ND decided to join a conference… them going to the Big Ten is not as simple as just applying for Big Ten membership
The long term best place for Cal sports is the B1G. That's the destination, goal. What is the best route? One thing is for sure, winning football games that matter is the one almost for sure thing that makes it possible. Internally Cal has to set that as the primary goal regardless of conference affiliation.
Red Coyote said:Yes the ACC will remain relevent as long as ND remains there even as a partial member. No question. The problem is if they ever do move.Piratefan2102 said:
If they sign the ACC's GOR and if their football product has not improved, they will be staying put in the ACC
Also: the ACC's contract with Notre Dame gives the ACC right of first refusal if ND decided to join a conference… them going to the Big Ten is not as simple as just applying for Big Ten membership
The long term best place for Cal sports is the B1G. That's the destination, goal. What is the best route? One thing is for sure, winning football games that matter is the one almost for sure thing that makes it possible. Internally Cal has to set that as the primary goal regardless of conference affiliation.
First Fire Knowlton
Then, immediately fire Wilcox.calumnus said:Red Coyote said:
The long term best place for Cal sports is the B1G. That's the destination, goal. What is the best route? One thing is for sure, winning football games that matter is the one almost for sure thing that makes it possible. Internally Cal has to set that as the primary goal regardless of conference affiliation.
First Fire Knowlton
Golden One said:Then, immediately fire Wilcox.calumnus said:Red Coyote said:
The long term best place for Cal sports is the B1G. That's the destination, goal. What is the best route? One thing is for sure, winning football games that matter is the one almost for sure thing that makes it possible. Internally Cal has to set that as the primary goal regardless of conference affiliation.
First Fire Knowlton
Don't think that's possible unless we have a secret billionaire donor. All we can do for the next couple of years is support the program and hope that we make history by having a coach who finally hits their stride in their 7th or 8th year on the job.
PtownBear1 said:Golden One said:Then, immediately fire Wilcox.calumnus said:Red Coyote said:
The long term best place for Cal sports is the B1G. That's the destination, goal. What is the best route? One thing is for sure, winning football games that matter is the one almost for sure thing that makes it possible. Internally Cal has to set that as the primary goal regardless of conference affiliation.
First Fire Knowlton
Don't think that's possible unless we have a secret billionaire donor. All we can do for the next couple of years is support the program and hope that we make history by having a coach who finally hits their stride in their 7th or 8th year on the job.
Agreed. The long term multi $million guaranteed contracts for Knowlton and Wilcox were completely unjustified and came at the worst time in history putting the very existence of Cal athletics at risk.
All we can do is hope Wilcox figures it out in year 7 or 8, we end up in a good conference and the players stick with the program.
At least Wilcox has shown the ability to have winning seasons. I'm not sure what Knowlton ever showed.
Dothechop2 said:
He said a vote was canceled last night. But they won't schedule one unless the vote is unanimous. Trying to make everyone happy. Trying to hammer out the details. And MHver isn't a reliable source.
Right. I don't put much stock in his tweets or the other dude from WV.
Maybe an odd question but….. does George Kliavkoff show up to the CFP meeting on Wed-Thurs? Lol
TROLLS.
Without doing my homework and reading through 13 pages of this thread, W4C has had one or more trolls and/or indignant souls pushed out of shape about the possible Calimony and questioning Cal's general worth, both academically and athletically, have there been any similar trolls on here?
I am just curious and disturbed at such asshats.
Without doing my homework and reading through 13 pages of this thread, W4C has had one or more trolls and/or indignant souls pushed out of shape about the possible Calimony and questioning Cal's general worth, both academically and athletically, have there been any similar trolls on here?
I am just curious and disturbed at such asshats.
"Just win, baby."
sycasey said:
At least Wilcox has shown the ability to have winning seasons. I'm not sure what Knowlton ever showed.
I absolutely do not want to defend Knowlton but consider:
Wilcox has only 1 winning season vs. FBS opponents. 2 if you count FCS opponents. No season with a winning record in conference. Cal's national computer rankings under his watch are worse than Holmoe's. Worst in our history actually. And he is on contract for nearly $5 million a year guaranteed through year 11.
And yet, Mark Fox was worse.
In fact, that is one of the major reasons Knowlton has been such a disaster.
When will the next $2 million investigation be completed?
I don't know how the other board works, but on this board, you can click on any user's screen name next to their comment, then click on "Ignore User" and choose how long you want to ignore them. After you ignore, then as long as you are logged in, you won't see comments made under the ignored user's screen name.Bowlesman80 said:
TROLLS.
Without doing my homework and reading through 13 pages of this thread, W4C has had one or more trolls and/or indignant souls pushed out of shape about the possible Calimony and questioning Cal's general worth, both academically and athletically, have there been any similar trolls on here?
I am just curious and disturbed at such asshats.
I'm also just happy that the national narrative seems to be changing regarding Cal and Stanford. For a week or so everyone was saying we had no value, which was always ridiculous. Cal is not a blue blood, in fact it's not even 2nd tier power. But it's also not a fresno st or new mexico, and I'm happy people are recognizing that again.
golden sloth said:
I'm also just happy that the national narrative seems to be changing regarding Cal and Stanford. For a week or so everyone was saying we had no value, which was always ridiculous. Cal is not a blue blood, in fact it's not even 2nd tier power. But it's also not a fresno st or new mexico, and I'm happy people are recognizing that again.
But we easily have the potential to be a Tier 2 power with occasional great seasons.
Thank you, explains much.BearSD said:I don't know how the other board works, but on this board, you can click on any user's screen name next to their comment, then click on "Ignore User" and choose how long you want to ignore them. After you ignore, then as long as you are logged in, you won't see comments made under the ignored user's screen name.Bowlesman80 said:
TROLLS.
Without doing my homework and reading through 13 pages of this thread, W4C has had one or more trolls and/or indignant souls pushed out of shape about the possible Calimony and questioning Cal's general worth, both academically and athletically, have there been any similar trolls on here?
I am just curious and disturbed at such asshats.
That being said, some of the debate needs to be had, so the troll(s) is/are engaged- battle joined.
"Just win, baby."
Just one, who is pushing Fresno State for R1 and a conspiracy theory that Cal is holding them down academically.Bowlesman80 said:
TROLLS.
Without doing my homework and reading through 13 pages of this thread, W4C has had one or more trolls and/or indignant souls pushed out of shape about the possible Calimony and questioning Cal's general worth, both academically and athletically, have there been any similar trolls on here?
I am just curious and disturbed at such asshats.
golden sloth said:
I'm also just happy that the national narrative seems to be changing regarding Cal and Stanford. For a week or so everyone was saying we had no value, which was always ridiculous. Cal is not a blue blood, in fact it's not even 2nd tier power. But it's also not a fresno st or new mexico, and I'm happy people are recognizing that again.
Fresno has better ratings than you, better attendance than you, and takes transfers from Cal. I think SJSU is the more accurate compare.
Featured Stories
See All
Washington Safety Tristan Dunn Signs With Cal
by Jim McGill
Bears Raise the Bar in Decisive 89-63 Win Over Temple
by Jim McGill