Cal88 said:

---

BearSD said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Utah doesn't bring much to the table, and the ACC is a poor fit for them compared to the B12.

---

Is that you Director Knowlton? You mean other than a top tier football program with sell out attendance and high TV ratings, and an athletic program also finished with a few million dollar surplus? They also are a poor fit with the ACC from a geography perspective as well. Sorta like Cal and Furd, but with a good football program and a solvent athletic department.

If and when it finally becomes the two mega conferences that everyone seems to predict is coming, Utah has a spot waiting since they bring to the table what matters, and Cal is left behind. Not that I like that, but at least most of us understand what drives conference realignment these days.

---

Utah is not a top tier football program, they have performed well lately but haven't fully shed their image as an upstart program. They are also in a pretty small market, and the least attractive former P12 South program.

---

LOL. If you actually think that Utah is just an "upstart" and that they are less valuable than Colorado, Arizona, and Arizona State, then you have just outed yourself as a BYU fan.

---

Utah was brought into the Pac-10 as a sidekick for Colorado, which was the main target for that expansion. And yes, UofA, ASU and CU are all more valuable programs than Utah, with longer histories and larger markets.

---

From what I remember, the pac 10 wanted a championship game to sell, and at the time the NCAA required two divisions of a minimum of 6 teams each. Thus the need for a 12th school. The NCAA has since dropped this requirement.

Utah was a mid-major program (WAC,MWC) until 2010.

CU was in the Big 8 with Nebraska and was a founding member of the Big 12, with a national championship in1990. UA and ASU have been in the Pac-10 since 1978.

Thats the only reason actually. If this is true.

Cal88 said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Utah doesn't bring much to the table, and the ACC is a poor fit for them compared to the B12.

---

Is that you Director Knowlton? You mean other than a top tier football program with sell out attendance and high TV ratings, and an athletic program also finished with a few million dollar surplus? They also are a poor fit with the ACC from a geography perspective as well. Sorta like Cal and Furd, but with a good football program and a solvent athletic department.

If and when it finally becomes the two mega conferences that everyone seems to predict is coming, Utah has a spot waiting since they bring to the table what matters, and Cal is left behind. Not that I like that, but at least most of us understand what drives conference realignment these days.

---

Utah is not a top tier football program, they have performed well lately but haven't fully shed their image as an upstart program. They are also in a pretty small market, and the least attractive former P12 South program.

I can't figure out why they would be interested in the ACC, all their neighbors are in the B12, which is the grouping of the best programs from the southern Mountain and Central time zones.

---

I'm trying to be nice here, but you have not figured out yet why Cal and Furd were was worth $4 million in TV revenue to the B1g, and only Utah could get a Notre Dame style contract with the Big 12 that said you can leave or stay at any time. It's more about market penetration than size itself. There are - sadly - quite a large number of Cal fans (and Furd fans since we have hitched our wagon to them) in the SF/San Jose market which is number 10 in size, but they don't watch Cal or Furd games. Utah is in the Salt Lake market which in the latest figures I saw is number 25 and growing (they also have viewership in the Las Vegas market, as the Bay Area schools have viewership in Sacramento and surrounds market). Large fan bases will help drive subscriptions to stuff like ESPN+ and Peacock, as well as provide large audiences on traditional linear TV broadcasts. Utah has a large fan base because they have been winning over the last decade - they have gone to a bowl each year. They are top 20 in wins over the last decade and the only Pac program with more wins was Oregon. The only Pac school that defies the you have to win to be watched mantra is USC, which is why their media value is so high, despite achieving mediocre results over the last 10 years.

Which College Football Program Is the Most Valuable ...Action Networkhttps://www.actionnetwork.com ncaaf college-footb...

And I can't see why Utah wants to leave either. Utah is predicted to win the Big 12 (Big 12 Football: Spring 2024 Power RankingsAthlon Sportshttps://athlonsports.com College Football). I don't know why they would not stay there and be king of the trailer park city schools (okay Provo and Ft. Worth are nice) until the next conference consolidation, unless they know something about the Big 12 that we don't. They already make a profit on the athletic department and they have a successful NIL collective (Jeep anyone?), so it is not like the hurting for money like say Cal. Cal is so desperate it is in a conference with teams on the other coast and is taking a hit in
TV revenues. If you can't see the huge discrepancy in program value, I can't help you.

In the last 20 years Utah has 2 BCS bowls, two Rose Bowl appearances and 17 total bowl appearances. If there ever was a golden two decades of Cal football, this is what it would look like.

Anarchistbear said:

---

In the last 20 years Utah has 2 BCS bowls, two Rose Bowl appearances and 17 total bowl appearances. If there ever was a golden two decades of Cal football, this is what it would look like.

---

Yet in what is Utah's golden age, they barely manage to crack the top 25 list of most viewed programs posted above by Wife:

https://www.actionnetwork.com/ncaaf/college-football-programs-nielsen-ratings

They are, after 2 BCS bowls, two Rose Bowl appearances and 17 total bowl appearances in the last 20 years, #25 on the list, 3 spots above Oregon State and 5 above WSU.

calumnus said:

---

<IF> Utah is able to get out of their GORs and jumps to the ACC (big Ifs), that would open up a Big-12 slot.

Would the B-12 go after:
1. San Diego State
2. Oregon State
3. Washington State
4. SMU(?)
5. Other?

---

With that list, can someone explain why SMU just didn't go to the Big 12...Geographically it seems a natural. I'm sure I am missing something that comes down to dinero.

Smaller than Tucson?

wifeisafurd said:

---

And I can't see why Utah wants to leave either. Utah is predicted to win the Big 12 (Big 12 Football: Spring 2024 Power RankingsAthlon Sportshttps://athlonsports.com College Football). I don't know why they would not stay there and be king of the trailer park city schools (okay Provo and Ft. Worth are nice)

---

That's the answer to your question, Shocky alluded to it. They aspire to be in our academic stratosphere and have been working hard across the board on it. Their grad schools are now Top 30-50 in many core sciences and math. They're smart and are using Football like Oregon to level up the students they attract. There are a number of high GPA kids in my area that didn't get the UC they wanted going to UU for undergrad next year.

They're claiming to be the highest ranked public school in the West.

I think it's far-fetched to believe this is happening any time soon but can believe there have been legit rumblings and discussions, esp. since Utah has the out clause in their contract.

wifeisafurd said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Utah doesn't bring much to the table, and the ACC is a poor fit for them compared to the B12.

---

Is that you Director Knowlton? You mean other than a top tier football program with sell out attendance and high TV ratings, and an athletic program also finished with a few million dollar surplus? They also are a poor fit with the ACC from a geography perspective as well. Sorta like Cal and Furd, but with a good football program and a solvent athletic department.

If and when it finally becomes the two mega conferences that everyone seems to predict is coming, Utah has a spot waiting since they bring to the table what matters, and Cal is left behind. Not that I like that, but at least most of us understand what drives conference realignment these days.

---

Utah is not a top tier football program, they have performed well lately but haven't fully shed their image as an upstart program. They are also in a pretty small market, and the least attractive former P12 South program.

I can't figure out why they would be interested in the ACC, all their neighbors are in the B12, which is the grouping of the best programs from the southern Mountain and Central time zones.

---

I'm trying to be nice here, but you have not figured out yet why Cal and Furd were was worth $4 million in TV revenue to the B1g, and only Utah could get a Notre Dame style contract with the Big 12 that said you can leave or stay at any time.

* * *

If you can't see the huge discrepancy in program value, I can't help you.

---

He chooses not to see it because he is a BYU fan. The only people who make the arguments he's making are BYU fans.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

<IF> Utah is able to get out of their GORs and jumps to the ACC (big Ifs), that would open up a Big-12 slot.

Would the B-12 go after:
1. San Diego State
2. Oregon State
3. Washington State
4. SMU(?)
5. Other?

---

With that list, can someone explain why SMU just didn't go to the Big 12...Geographically it seems a natural. I'm sure I am missing something that comes down to dinero.

---

Baylor, TCU, Houston, and Texas Tech don't want SMU in the Big 12. Those four and SMU are competing for the same pool of local recruits that aren't quite good enough to get SEC offers. In the age of players getting legally paid by boosters, SMU's overly generous boosters give SMU an advantage -- not an advantage over Texas, Texas A&M, and Oklahoma, but an advantage over the teams in the latest version of the Big 12.

Cal88 said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

In the last 20 years Utah has 2 BCS bowls, two Rose Bowl appearances and 17 total bowl appearances. If there ever was a golden two decades of Cal football, this is what it would look like.

---

Yet in what is Utah's golden age, they barely manage to crack the top 25 list of most viewed programs posted above by Wife:

https://www.actionnetwork.com/ncaaf/college-football-programs-nielsen-ratings

They are, after 2 BCS bowls, two Rose Bowl appearances and 17 total bowl appearances in the last 20 years, #25 on the list, 3 spots above Oregon State and 5 above WSU.

---

Colorado and Duke are a joke on that list- one year wonders.

Yes, Utah is a top 25 program, above UCLA, Cal and Stanford, reputably big media markets

BearSD said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

<IF> Utah is able to get out of their GORs and jumps to the ACC (big Ifs), that would open up a Big-12 slot.

Would the B-12 go after:
1. San Diego State
2. Oregon State
3. Washington State
4. SMU(?)
5. Other?

---

With that list, can someone explain why SMU just didn't go to the Big 12...Geographically it seems a natural. I'm sure I am missing something that comes down to dinero.

---

Baylor, TCU, Houston, and Texas Tech don't want SMU in the Big 12. Those four and SMU are competing for the same pool of local recruits that aren't quite good enough to get SEC offers. In the age of players getting legally paid by boosters, SMU's overly generous boosters give SMU an advantage -- not an advantage over Texas, Texas A&M, and Oklahoma, but an advantage over the teams in the latest version of the Big 12.

---

Yeah, they never had an offer from the Big 12. They saw their chance to horn in and assist Cal/Stanford's desperate move to get into the ACC and took it.

sycasey said:

---

BearSD said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

<IF> Utah is able to get out of their GORs and jumps to the ACC (big Ifs), that would open up a Big-12 slot.

Would the B-12 go after:
1. San Diego State
2. Oregon State
3. Washington State
4. SMU(?)
5. Other?

---

With that list, can someone explain why SMU just didn't go to the Big 12...Geographically it seems a natural. I'm sure I am missing something that comes down to dinero.

---

Baylor, TCU, Houston, and Texas Tech don't want SMU in the Big 12. Those four and SMU are competing for the same pool of local recruits that aren't quite good enough to get SEC offers. In the age of players getting legally paid by boosters, SMU's overly generous boosters give SMU an advantage -- not an advantage over Texas, Texas A&M, and Oklahoma, but an advantage over the teams in the latest version of the Big 12.

---

Yeah, they never had an offer from the Big 12. They saw their chance to horn in and assist Cal/Stanford's desperate move to get into the ACC and took it.

---

As BearSD pointed out, SMU was far more attractive to the ACC, which had zero presence in Texas, while the B12 already has the state covered/saturated. The only Texas program the B12 would take at this point is A&M.

Anarchistbear said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

In the last 20 years Utah has 2 BCS bowls, two Rose Bowl appearances and 17 total bowl appearances. If there ever was a golden two decades of Cal football, this is what it would look like.

---

Yet in what is Utah's golden age, they barely manage to crack the top 25 list of most viewed programs posted above by Wife:

https://www.actionnetwork.com/ncaaf/college-football-programs-nielsen-ratings

They are, after 2 BCS bowls, two Rose Bowl appearances and 17 total bowl appearances in the last 20 years, #25 on the list, 3 spots above Oregon State and 5 above WSU.

---

Colorado and Duke are a joke on that list- one year wonders.

Yes, Utah is a top 25 program, above UCLA, Cal and Stanford, reputably big media markets

---

Colorado, UCLA are stronger brands than Utah. Duke had an interesting season and story as a basketball school breaking through in football.

Quote:

---

Smaller than Tucson?

---

You can't confine Arizona to its local town, any more than you would confine Michigan State to East Lansing or Wisconsin to Madison. UofA owns their state along with ASU, a state more than twice the population size of Utah, and they are the top basketball brand west of Kansas.

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

BearSD said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

<IF> Utah is able to get out of their GORs and jumps to the ACC (big Ifs), that would open up a Big-12 slot.

Would the B-12 go after:
1. San Diego State
2. Oregon State
3. Washington State
4. SMU(?)
5. Other?

---

With that list, can someone explain why SMU just didn't go to the Big 12...Geographically it seems a natural. I'm sure I am missing something that comes down to dinero.

---

Baylor, TCU, Houston, and Texas Tech don't want SMU in the Big 12. Those four and SMU are competing for the same pool of local recruits that aren't quite good enough to get SEC offers. In the age of players getting legally paid by boosters, SMU's overly generous boosters give SMU an advantage -- not an advantage over Texas, Texas A&M, and Oklahoma, but an advantage over the teams in the latest version of the Big 12.

---

Yeah, they never had an offer from the Big 12. They saw their chance to horn in and assist Cal/Stanford's desperate move to get into the ACC and took it.

---

As BearSD pointed out, SMU was far more attractive to the ACC, which had zero presence in Texas, while the B12 already has the state covered/saturated. The only Texas program the B12 would take at this point is A&M.

---

The big attraction of SMU was that they were willing to take zero payout. More money for everyone else.

After that, yes, a presence in Texas is nice.

FWIW, much to do about nothing, as both the AD and Utah President, said there is no interest in the ACC.

BearSD said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

<IF> Utah is able to get out of their GORs and jumps to the ACC (big Ifs), that would open up a Big-12 slot.

Would the B-12 go after:
1. San Diego State
2. Oregon State
3. Washington State
4. SMU(?)
5. Other?

---

With that list, can someone explain why SMU just didn't go to the Big 12...Geographically it seems a natural. I'm sure I am missing something that comes down to dinero.

---

Baylor, TCU, Houston, and Texas Tech don't want SMU in the Big 12. Those four and SMU are competing for the same pool of local recruits that aren't quite good enough to get SEC offers. In the age of players getting legally paid by boosters, SMU's overly generous boosters give SMU an advantage -- not an advantage over Texas, Texas A&M, and Oklahoma, but an advantage over the teams in the latest version of the Big 12.

---

And we now that we have focused our recruiting on Texas we get the players those 8 schools overlook?

Cal88 said:

---

Utah doesn't bring much to the table, and the ACC is a poor fit for them compared to the B12.

---

I disagree. Utah loved being in the Pac 12 with the quality schools and they are an AAU university. Their academics increased dramatically with the Pac 12 deal - and mostly because of their use of the Cal and Stanford connections they had. They got a lot out of that. Also - the average Bug 12 contract goes down starting g in 2025 because Texas and Oklahoma are leaving. It goes from 31
Million average to 27 million. The discussion that the Big 12 had a better deal is wrong compared to the ACC. To be honest I think the folks at the 4
Corners schools would be happy to come to the ACC and kill the Big 12. I could aee them taking the rest of the AAU teams from the Big 12 which would leave those guys with not a lot of good teams.

Oski87 said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Utah doesn't bring much to the table, and the ACC is a poor fit for them compared to the B12.

---

I disagree. Utah loved being in the Pac 12 with the quality schools and they are an AAU university. Their academics increased dramatically with the Pac 12 deal - and mostly because of their use of the Cal and Stanford connections they had. They got a lot out of that. Also - the average Bug 12 contract goes down starting g in 2025 because Texas and Oklahoma are leaving. It goes from 31
Million average to 27 million. The discussion that the Big 12 had a better deal is wrong compared to the ACC. To be honest I think the folks at the 4
Corners schools would be happy to come to the ACC and kill the Big 12. I could aee them taking the rest of the AAU teams from the Big 12 which would leave those guys with not a lot of good teams.

---

It would probably be best to let Utah determine where they fit best, instead of dictating to them where they should be.