Why Cal+Furd not invited to Big Ten?

8,365 Views | 35 Replies | Last: 1 yr ago by prospeCt
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sorry, late to the game and I'm sure you all have discussed this in other threads, BUT

I'm looking at all the conference realignments and it would have made more historic sense to unify the original PAC-6 teams in the Big Ten.

Why did that not work out for two historic Bay Area schools?
6956bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Fox Sports
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The current Big Ten membership consists of:

Ohio State
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Maryland
Michigan
Michigan State
Minnesota
Nebraska
Northwestern
Penn State
Purdue
Rutgers
Wisconsin

Add USC and UCLA

Then add Washington and Oregon

= 18 teams.

Missing Cal and Stanford for an even 20.



Meanwhile:
ACC
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
6956bear said:

Fox Sports


Please expand on that.
KenBurnski
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Holy **** dude read one of the nine million threads on the topic. It will be a fun journey away from OT.
sosheezy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concordtom said:

6956bear said:

Fox Sports


Please expand on that.

They valued the Bay Area schools and market poorly and wouldn't offer any additional money to the Big Tens deal to add us. The current schools refused to take a penny less out of their shares to add us.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Fox just didn't consider the Bay Area a market worth adding and wouldn't pony up the extra cash to add us. Unlike ESPN (who has the ACC contract), they don't pay an automatic extra amount per school; Fox have to approve each new addition.

Either they never wanted us at all or their numbers were a complete lowball compared to the ACC.
nikeykid
How long do you want to ignore this user?
water under the bridge. cmon who cares now. we get a chance to survive and this was the only path available to us.
oski003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concordtom said:

6956bear said:

Fox Sports


Please expand on that.


Can't you just spend 30 minutes reading the Big10 topics over the past two weeks instead of pissing on our ACC invite with this stupid thread? Unbelievable.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oski003 said:

concordtom said:

6956bear said:

Fox Sports


Please expand on that.


Can't you just spend 30 minutes reading the Big10 topics over the past two weeks instead of pissing on our ACC invite with this stupid thread? Unbelievable.


30 minutes???
Try 30 hours.
The Growls thread has thousands of posts on all this for months.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
KenBurnski said:

Holy **** dude read one of the nine million threads on the topic. It will be a fun journey away from OT.


Sosheezy and Sycasey have got my back.
Thanks, guys.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

Fox just didn't consider the Bay Area a market worth adding and wouldn't pony up the extra cash to add us. Unlike ESPN (who has the ACC contract), they don't pay an automatic extra amount per school; Fox have to approve each new addition.

Either they never wanted us at all or their numbers were a complete lowball compared to the ACC.


You know what?
I'm going to carry that as a badge of honor.
We here in the Bay have more exciting and important stuff to do than sit around and watch college sports every weekend, drinking Pabst Blue Ribbon.

Napa Chardonnay, please!
We're far too sophisticated for them!!!

Econ141
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concordtom said:

sycasey said:

Fox just didn't consider the Bay Area a market worth adding and wouldn't pony up the extra cash to add us. Unlike ESPN (who has the ACC contract), they don't pay an automatic extra amount per school; Fox have to approve each new addition.

Either they never wanted us at all or their numbers were a complete lowball compared to the ACC.


You know what?
I'm going to carry that as a badge of honor.
We here in the Bay have more exciting and important stuff to do than sit around and watch college sports every weekend, drinking Pabst Bule Ribbon.

Napa Chardonnay, please!
We're far more sophisticated for them!!!




And this folks is why we were left trembling in fear until this morning that we wouldn't have an athletics dept.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concordtom said:

sycasey said:

Fox just didn't consider the Bay Area a market worth adding and wouldn't pony up the extra cash to add us. Unlike ESPN (who has the ACC contract), they don't pay an automatic extra amount per school; Fox have to approve each new addition.

Either they never wanted us at all or their numbers were a complete lowball compared to the ACC.


You know what?
I'm going to carry that as a badge of honor.
We here in the Bay have more exciting and important stuff to do than sit around and watch college sports every weekend, drinking Pabst Blue Ribbon.

Napa Chardonnay, please!
We're far too sophisticated for them!!!



I wouldn't advertise this attitude too broadly if you are hoping for a future invite.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You were trembling.
I was on my yacht, hahaha.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

concordtom said:

sycasey said:

Fox just didn't consider the Bay Area a market worth adding and wouldn't pony up the extra cash to add us. Unlike ESPN (who has the ACC contract), they don't pay an automatic extra amount per school; Fox have to approve each new addition.

Either they never wanted us at all or their numbers were a complete lowball compared to the ACC.


You know what?
I'm going to carry that as a badge of honor.
We here in the Bay have more exciting and important stuff to do than sit around and watch college sports every weekend, drinking Pabst Blue Ribbon.

Napa Chardonnay, please!
We're far too sophisticated for them!!!



I wouldn't advertise this attitude too broadly if you are hoping for a future invite.


Hey, I'll advertise it loudly.
College sports is a corrupt scam by big wigs who make millions, at the expense of the players, with nervous nellie fans and their viewership dollars roped along the way.

People should protest the laws so that colleges simply go ahead and bid outright for the services of players like regular salaries. Not all this secret cloak and dagger NIL business, although that's an improvement over the old ways.

Cal and Stanford could have been leaders in the new realm, not desperate tagalongs.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Let's cut to the chase:

What's the over-under on how many years we are aligned with the Atlantic Coast Conference?
Econ141
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concordtom said:

You were trembling.
I was on my yacht, hahaha.


Happy for you man! Hope you can give some of that yacht-life money to the CAlegends per Sebastabear's latest message.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Whatever…. I'll get behind it.
Just wait until our Sturdy Golden Bears start running the ball down their throats.

HA!! Take THAT you ACC victims!

concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Econ141 said:

concordtom said:

You were trembling.
I was on my yacht, hahaha.


Happy for you man! Hope you can give some of that yacht-life money to the CAlegends per Sebastabear's latest message.


Sorry. Future inheritance has already been given to professorship endowments. And who knows what else is in the pipeline. Certainly no yacht for me. It was a metaphor.
Education first!
91Cal
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concordtom said:

Whatever…. I'll get behind it.
Just wait until our Sturdy Golden Bears start running the ball down their throats.

HA!! Take THAT you ACC victims!



Please also see Sebastabear's thread and donate so we can reward the players for their hard work, dedication and smarts for attending the greatest institution of higher learning in the world! Go Bears!
OdontoBear66
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

concordtom said:

sycasey said:

Fox just didn't consider the Bay Area a market worth adding and wouldn't pony up the extra cash to add us. Unlike ESPN (who has the ACC contract), they don't pay an automatic extra amount per school; Fox have to approve each new addition.

Either they never wanted us at all or their numbers were a complete lowball compared to the ACC.


You know what?
I'm going to carry that as a badge of honor.
We here in the Bay have more exciting and important stuff to do than sit around and watch college sports every weekend, drinking Pabst Blue Ribbon.

Napa Chardonnay, please!
We're far too sophisticated for them!!!



I wouldn't advertise this attitude too broadly if you are hoping for a future invite.
Late to the party and full of opinion. Go Tom
RedlessWardrobe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concordtom said:

Sorry, late to the game and I'm sure you all have discussed this in other threads, BUT

I'm looking at all the conference realignments and it would have made more historic sense to unify the original PAC-6 teams in the Big Ten.

Why did that not work out for two historic Bay Area schools?
Late to the game? The understatement of 2023. When I first saw this thread I thought it was started months ago. Too funny.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OdontoBear66 said:

sycasey said:

concordtom said:

sycasey said:

Fox just didn't consider the Bay Area a market worth adding and wouldn't pony up the extra cash to add us. Unlike ESPN (who has the ACC contract), they don't pay an automatic extra amount per school; Fox have to approve each new addition.

Either they never wanted us at all or their numbers were a complete lowball compared to the ACC.


You know what?
I'm going to carry that as a badge of honor.
We here in the Bay have more exciting and important stuff to do than sit around and watch college sports every weekend, drinking Pabst Blue Ribbon.

Napa Chardonnay, please!
We're far too sophisticated for them!!!



I wouldn't advertise this attitude too broadly if you are hoping for a future invite.
Late to the party and full of opinion. Go Tom


I'll give you a star for that one, my friend.
Touche!
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
91Cal said:

concordtom said:

Whatever…. I'll get behind it.
Just wait until our Sturdy Golden Bears start running the ball down their throats.

HA!! Take THAT you ACC victims!



Please also see Sebastabear's thread and donate so we can reward the players for their hard work, dedication and smarts for attending the greatest institution of higher learning in the world! Go Bears!


OR, I think I read there will be a bigger $ payout for the newcomers if they succeed in the W-L book. So, perhaps some or all of that should be kicked down to the folks who actually win on the field, rather than fill the coders of the higher ups, or be redistributed to others elsewhere, as typically happens.

I KNOW all the Republicans on this board will agree with this proposal, as they believe so strongly in incentive-motivation-performance-reward structures and are NOT into redistribution of winners' hauls.

But I'll see you on OT for a continuation of that thought. Start a thread on it, we'll have a hay day!
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RedlessWardrobe said:

concordtom said:

Sorry, late to the game and I'm sure you all have discussed this in other threads, BUT

I'm looking at all the conference realignments and it would have made more historic sense to unify the original PAC-6 teams in the Big Ten.

Why did that not work out for two historic Bay Area schools?
Late to the game? The understatement of 2023. When I first saw this thread I thought it was started months ago. Too funny.



I was a late night crammer.
It's how I made through college, and NOT into Cal!
RedlessWardrobe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concordtom said:

RedlessWardrobe said:

concordtom said:

Sorry, late to the game and I'm sure you all have discussed this in other threads, BUT

I'm looking at all the conference realignments and it would have made more historic sense to unify the original PAC-6 teams in the Big Ten.

Why did that not work out for two historic Bay Area schools?
Late to the game? The understatement of 2023. When I first saw this thread I thought it was started months ago. Too funny.



I was a late night crammer.
It's how I made through college, and not into Cal!
No worries. In reality you are really much better off if you haven't exposed yourself to all the BS us other posters have had to deal with in the last two months!
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RedlessWardrobe said:

concordtom said:

RedlessWardrobe said:

concordtom said:

Sorry, late to the game and I'm sure you all have discussed this in other threads, BUT

I'm looking at all the conference realignments and it would have made more historic sense to unify the original PAC-6 teams in the Big Ten.

Why did that not work out for two historic Bay Area schools?
Late to the game? The understatement of 2023. When I first saw this thread I thought it was started months ago. Too funny.



I was a late night crammer.
It's how I made through college, and not into Cal!
No worries. In reality you are really much better off if you haven't exposed yourself to all the BS us other posters have had to deal with in the last two months!


Hahaha.
Yeah, I was avoiding all the sad news, to tell you the truth.
I'm totally bummed that the great PAC 6/8/10/12 is no more.

Play the trumpets, Sam. Then play it again.
Greedy dollars trumps tradition. Oooo, I hate saying that. Let's just strike the word from the English dictionary!

golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Here is the most succinct summary I can do of everything that has happened:

1. Fox wanted USC to join the B1G and USC wanted to leave to chase money and football playoff glory. They brought UCLA as their tag along.

2. The market for media rights turned south over the last two years, and with the biggest media market off the table for the Pac-12, the media deal looked bad. Surely, exacerbated by the P12 commissioner.

3. When the numbers came in, Colorado left for the Big-XII which had a clause in their TV contract that allowed the conference to receive a full share from the networks per P5 school added up to four.

4. The now Pac-9 went back to the networks and had a deal in place that was not great, but passable.

5. Fox & the Big Ten stepped in at the last moment to poach Washington and Oregon, who agreed to reduced shares for several years.

6. Arizona, Arizona st, and Utah then knew the remnants of the Pac-12 were going to receive a terrible deal and left to fill the final 3 full-share spots in the Big-XII.

7. The B1G schools apparently desired Cal and Stanford but Fox would not provide any additional money, and although the schools wanted to add them, they were not willing to accept less money to do so. (That is why there is no B1G invite).

8. With the SEC not expanding, and the networks out of money for the additional schools in the B1G and Big-XII, the options were join the ACC, add a bunch of mid-majors to the Pac, join a mid major, or go independent. Only the ACC offered the sort of money that would prevent a sports apocalypse at Cal and Stanford.

9. ESPN and ND pushed to add the schools to the ACC, while FSU, UNC and Clemson tried to use expansion as a way to destroy the conference so they can join the B1G or SEC without paying an exit fee.

10. NCST realized that Cal, Stanford, and SMU provides resiliency in case the FSU, UNC, and Clemson leave and switched their vote.

That said, I think everyone believes the ACC will still collapse with the most valued schools moving to the B1G and SEC, so yes, we will be in this spot again in a few years. A lot speculate this will align with the B1G's next media contract at the end of the decade.

My personal speculation is that the B1G still wants a 24 team conference, with 4 pods of 6 in each region, and they desire ND most, with three ACC schools joining Penn st, Rutgers and Maryland in an Atlantic pod. That may open the door for Cal/Stanford to complete the west coast pod, but we'd be the last ones in, and there is competition with some other contenders.

I believe the SEC will follow suit in picking up the other best ACC properties, and have between 20 and 24 schools. These two conferences will dominate the media and money and become a semi-pro league, and college football will devolve into the following tiers: the Power 2 conferences of the B1G and SEC, 2 quasi-power conferences of Big-XIi and ACC, and everyone else.

At the end of the day, the B1G and the SEC are the only two conferences with long-term viability, and although we received a temporary stay of execution, in the ACC, we need to still do everything we can to get into the B1G.
acvbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"7. The B1G schools apparently desired Cal and Stanford but Fox would not provide any additional money, and although the schools wanted to add them, they were not willing to accept less money to do so. (That is why there is no B1G invite)."

What blows my mind is once it seemed we were going to the ACC - there wasn't a push by them to bring us in at the reduced share for Fox to keep ESPN out of the west coast. oh well.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
YOU ARE A CHAMPION!
Thank you.
Excellent!!!
6956bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concordtom said:

6956bear said:

Fox Sports


Please expand on that.
They were paramount in getting USC and UCLA in to begin with. They then told the B1G Presidents that Cal and Stanford were not additive and would not agree to pay even reduced shares for their inclusion. Fox Sports is trying really hard to become the new leader in college football. They are the primary force behind this college realignment.

Fox despite not having to agreed to pay the Big 12 to add Colorado, ASU,UA and Utah. Only ESPN had a pro rata agreement. They came in at the 11th hour and agreed to pay for UO and UW to the B1G.

The Fox sports talking heads like Brock Huard have been dogging both Cal and Stanford since this entire realignment scenario began last July. They seemingly wanted both to drop out of the P4.

Fox Sports is throwing their weight around. They need a come uppance. I have never been a Notre Dame fan. But when they play USC and Ohio State as they do this year I will be rooting for the Irish. Both of those games are in South Bend.

I got 2 words for Fox Sports. They are not Happy Birthday.
golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
acvbear said:

"7. The B1G schools apparently desired Cal and Stanford but Fox would not provide any additional money, and although the schools wanted to add them, they were not willing to accept less money to do so. (That is why there is no B1G invite)."

What blows my mind is once it seemed we were going to the ACC - there wasn't a push by them to bring us in at the reduced share for Fox to keep ESPN out of the west coast. oh well.


I simply think the networks and B1G dont want to waste their chance at ND or the best of the ACC on Cal/Stanford.
ninetyfourbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
golden sloth said:

I simply think the networks and B1G dont want to waste their chance at ND or the best of the ACC on Cal/Stanford.


Good point. Further expansion by the B1G and SEC will likely be between six and fourteen schools to get to 20 or 24. ND, FSU, Clemson, and UNC are four of those schools. Not a lot of other spots open after that.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So, hmmmm.

Who here remembers when the PAC announced the birth of Pac12 Network?

It was supposed to be a windfall of cash for the schools. Cut out the big boys and go direct to the people.

Seems to me, after reading the last couple posts, that THAT put us on an island and a collision course with the big boys to be picked apart and defeated.

In retrospect, had we aligned ourselves with one of the bigger players, it wouldn't have come to this at all. The conference would still be alive.

They conquered the Pac12 Network by picking off members.

Same thing happens in every other industry. Consolidation.

What was that guy's name? Larry Scott?
Yeah. He's the one who killed the Pac10. He expanded to 12, but that wasn't big enough.

Unless he's gonna push back and say "I wanted 16, but they voted it down."

We had plenty of threads about Pac16.
But it wouldn't have mattered. The go-it-alone via xfinity and Directv was a LOSER long ago. It's the very reason I stopped watching Cal games. Pac12 network is not streaming on YouTubeTV. Or on its own.

It's the network deal that did this.
You idiots!!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Scott_(sports_administrator)

Hired 2009
Fired 2021
His claim to fame was getting tennis broadcasting stuff going. Hmmm.

LATimes addressed this very question. Let's see what they had to say:

https://www.latimes.com/sports/story/2022-07-07/did-larry-scott-kill-the-pac-12-the-answer-is-more-complicated-than-you-might-think
Page 1 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.