Where? to the Big 10? Unclear that they would want them but I guess they could realign into 4 divisions.eastcoastcal said:
Once they're gone, Furd, Oregon, & the Arizona's are leaving too. end of the conference (at least its relevancy).
good question. oregon's a national power. i think they'd easily be able to find an upgrade over the pac. maybe even go the ND route.socaltownie said:Where? to the Big 10? Unclear that they would want them but I guess they could realign into 4 divisions.eastcoastcal said:
Once they're gone, Furd, Oregon, & the Arizona's are leaving too. end of the conference (at least its relevancy).
I wondered about this, too. Would the Board of Regents have to approve this move for UCLA?socaltownie said:
I will believe that the Office of the President will approve this when hell freezes over.
I am not sure a Regents decision but I am guessing OoP. As others have said over on the football board - the challenge is the stadium debt (and then Cal's compliance with Title IX because of the required football revenue).HearstMining said:I wondered about this, too. Would the Board of Regents have to approve this move for UCLA?socaltownie said:
I will believe that the Office of the President will approve this when hell freezes over.
Furd? Going to the Ivy League? They won't even allow NIL collectives, or allow players to become employees, which btw is the real structural change coming at a NLRB near you.eastcoastcal said:
Once they're gone, Furd, Oregon, & the Arizona's are leaving too. end of the conference (at least its relevancy).
they could go independent. either way why would they stay in the pac? all of their california rivals are gone. I sincerely would be shocked if they don't go B10 or indepdendent.wifeisafurd said:Furd? Going to the Ivy League? They won't even allow NIL collectives, or allow players to become employees, which btw is the real structural change coming at a NLRB near you.eastcoastcal said:
Once they're gone, Furd, Oregon, & the Arizona's are leaving too. end of the conference (at least its relevancy).
Cal's relevance in college football and basketball died many years ago.parentswerebears said:
Did you hear Cal's relevance in "college" sports just die?
Golden One said:Cal's relevance in college football and basketball died many years ago.parentswerebears said:
Did you hear Cal's relevance in "college" sports just die?
socaltownie said:I am not sure a Regents decision but I am guessing OoP. As others have said over on the football board - the challenge is the stadium debt (and then Cal's compliance with Title IX because of the required football revenue).HearstMining said:I wondered about this, too. Would the Board of Regents have to approve this move for UCLA?socaltownie said:
I will believe that the Office of the President will approve this when hell freezes over.
fat_slice said:socaltownie said:I am not sure a Regents decision but I am guessing OoP. As others have said over on the football board - the challenge is the stadium debt (and then Cal's compliance with Title IX because of the required football revenue).HearstMining said:I wondered about this, too. Would the Board of Regents have to approve this move for UCLA?socaltownie said:
I will believe that the Office of the President will approve this when hell freezes over.
Can someone explain this challenge? Challenge to what? Doesn't the stadium debt kind of force the admin to actually care about football? If it weren't for this I feel the admin would be perfectly fine letting football die out.
socaltownie said:
I will believe that the Office of the President will approve this when hell freezes over.
parentswerebears said:
I actually think that divorcing sports from the university is just a good idea at this point. Maybe the sports teams pay the schools for use of names and venues, but really- football and basketball are pretty much their own entities at most of the big name school anyway, right?
SFCityBear said:
Interesting that the idea of joining the Ivy League has cropped up again. Way back in the 1960's, with the PCC still on shaky footing with the recruiting scandals of the 1950s still fresh in their minds, and the sub-par play of their football teams, both Cal and Stanford were toying with the idea of joining the Ivy League. It seemed a natural fit to many people. Cal had its last heyday in football with Waldorf's teams of the late 1940s and early 1950s, and its last heyday in basketball with Pete Newell's teams of the late 1950s and 1960. Recruiting was going to get more difficult due to stricter academic requirements. The big drawback would have been the increased coast to coast travel, in both time away from studies and the cost. The idea never got much traction.
I think it might be something worth considering, if they would have us. It would be a more attractive package if Stanford were to join us, as they have more natural rivalries with the all or mostly all private schools, and Cal being a public school. The Cal Crew has natural rivalries with the Ivy League schools, but do we have any other rivalries with them, except academic? I'm not sure they would accept us, due to our puny by comparison fees vs their tuition.
concordtom said:SFCityBear said:
Interesting that the idea of joining the Ivy League has cropped up again. ........
I actually like the idea a lot. We. Have discussed it before.
Who are the top academic institutions this side of the Rockies which also have top sports programs?
Form an Ivy West League.
I'd start with Cal and Stanford.RJABear said:
Who would be a west coast ivy ?
- Cal
- Stanford
- Cal Tech
- Pomona/ Harvey Mudd / Pitzer
but then who
- UC Davis ?
- Reed
- Lewis & Clark ?
- Puget Sound ?
- Pepperdine ?
stu said:I'd start with Cal and Stanford.RJABear said:
Who would be a west coast ivy ?
- Cal
- Stanford
- Cal Tech
- Pomona/ Harvey Mudd / Pitzer
but then who
- UC Davis ?
- Reed
- Lewis & Clark ?
- Puget Sound ?
- Pepperdine ?
Then the other UC campuses (except of course UCLA and UCSF).
Northwestern would fit (except their coast is Lake Michigan).
Rice would fit (except their coast is the Gulf).
I don't think the others you mentioned (or Whitman) are big enough for football.
Big C said:stu said:I'd start with Cal and Stanford.RJABear said:
Who would be a west coast ivy ?
- Cal
- Stanford
- Cal Tech
- Pomona/ Harvey Mudd / Pitzer
but then who
- UC Davis ?
- Reed
- Lewis & Clark ?
- Puget Sound ?
- Pepperdine ?
Then the other UC campuses (except of course UCLA and UCSF).
Northwestern would fit (except their coast is Lake Michigan).
Rice would fit (except their coast is the Gulf).
I don't think the others you mentioned (or Whitman) are big enough for football.
What if they weren't "ivies", but just schools in the west? Start with the former Pac schools that didn't go to the "B1G": WSU, OSU, the Arizonas. Maybe Colorado and Utah (maybe not). Nevada, UNLV, maybe UC Davis, Boise St, SDSU. Sac St? Air Force? We play Stanfurd every year as our last game. The top teams from this "lesser Pac" conference would go to some sort of piss ant bowl game.
I don't know exactly, but some combination of some of the above schools.
Sure, recruiting would drop off a bit, as would quality of play. But probably not all that much. I really don't see how it would be all that much different than what we've been doing, except no LA schools, no UW or Oregon.
Yep, the economics would force significant downsizing. But I've never bought into the concept that students should have some God-given right to play their sport at the NCAA level. I fully support Title IX, but unless your program is Stanford, you have to live within your economic means. Somehow, UC Davis and others do it, so Cal could, too. For the sports that don't make the cut, club-level teams may be a great option. My sons both played club-level soccer (not at Cal, but Cal's club team was an opponent) and had great experiences, playing with teammates who were plenty skilled but didn't want to juggle the demands of an NCAA sport with their education.eastcoastcal said:Big C said:stu said:I'd start with Cal and Stanford.RJABear said:
Who would be a west coast ivy ?
- Cal
- Stanford
- Cal Tech
- Pomona/ Harvey Mudd / Pitzer
but then who
- UC Davis ?
- Reed
- Lewis & Clark ?
- Puget Sound ?
- Pepperdine ?
Then the other UC campuses (except of course UCLA and UCSF).
Northwestern would fit (except their coast is Lake Michigan).
Rice would fit (except their coast is the Gulf).
I don't think the others you mentioned (or Whitman) are big enough for football.
What if they weren't "ivies", but just schools in the west? Start with the former Pac schools that didn't go to the "B1G": WSU, OSU, the Arizonas. Maybe Colorado and Utah (maybe not). Nevada, UNLV, maybe UC Davis, Boise St, SDSU. Sac St? Air Force? We play Stanfurd every year as our last game. The top teams from this "lesser Pac" conference would go to some sort of piss ant bowl game.
I don't know exactly, but some combination of some of the above schools.
Sure, recruiting would drop off a bit, as would quality of play. But probably not all that much. I really don't see how it would be all that much different than what we've been doing, except no LA schools, no UW or Oregon.
Our TV deal would be absolutely terrible with these teams and we'd have to fold many, many sports as a result
Only a very few people would really care.eastcoastcal said:Big C said:
What if they weren't "ivies", but just schools in the west? Start with the former Pac schools that didn't go to the "B1G": WSU, OSU, the Arizonas. Maybe Colorado and Utah (maybe not). Nevada, UNLV, maybe UC Davis, Boise St, SDSU. Sac St? Air Force? We play Stanfurd every year as our last game. The top teams from this "lesser Pac" conference would go to some sort of piss ant bowl game.
I don't know exactly, but some combination of some of the above schools.
Sure, recruiting would drop off a bit, as would quality of play. But probably not all that much. I really don't see how it would be all that much different than what we've been doing, except no LA schools, no UW or Oregon.
Our TV deal would be absolutely terrible with these teams and we'd have to fold many, many sports as a result
Golden One said:Only a very few people would really care.eastcoastcal said:Big C said:
What if they weren't "ivies", but just schools in the west? Start with the former Pac schools that didn't go to the "B1G": WSU, OSU, the Arizonas. Maybe Colorado and Utah (maybe not). Nevada, UNLV, maybe UC Davis, Boise St, SDSU. Sac St? Air Force? We play Stanfurd every year as our last game. The top teams from this "lesser Pac" conference would go to some sort of piss ant bowl game.
I don't know exactly, but some combination of some of the above schools.
Sure, recruiting would drop off a bit, as would quality of play. But probably not all that much. I really don't see how it would be all that much different than what we've been doing, except no LA schools, no UW or Oregon.
Our TV deal would be absolutely terrible with these teams and we'd have to fold many, many sports as a result
eastcoastcal said:Big C said:stu said:I'd start with Cal and Stanford.RJABear said:
Who would be a west coast ivy ?
- Cal
- Stanford
- Cal Tech
- Pomona/ Harvey Mudd / Pitzer
but then who
- UC Davis ?
- Reed
- Lewis & Clark ?
- Puget Sound ?
- Pepperdine ?
Then the other UC campuses (except of course UCLA and UCSF).
Northwestern would fit (except their coast is Lake Michigan).
Rice would fit (except their coast is the Gulf).
I don't think the others you mentioned (or Whitman) are big enough for football.
What if they weren't "ivies", but just schools in the west? Start with the former Pac schools that didn't go to the "B1G": WSU, OSU, the Arizonas. Maybe Colorado and Utah (maybe not). Nevada, UNLV, maybe UC Davis, Boise St, SDSU. Sac St? Air Force? We play Stanfurd every year as our last game. The top teams from this "lesser Pac" conference would go to some sort of piss ant bowl game.
I don't know exactly, but some combination of some of the above schools.
Sure, recruiting would drop off a bit, as would quality of play. But probably not all that much. I really don't see how it would be all that much different than what we've been doing, except no LA schools, no UW or Oregon.
Our TV deal would be absolutely terrible with these teams and we'd have to fold many, many sports as a result
Instructive to see how the Big West UC's do it (UCSB, UCSD, UCI, UCR). They don't provide much in the way of scholarships, the travel is essentially local and they don't field football. I leave it to others on a Sunday to go onto their websites and count teams.Big C said:Golden One said:Only a very few people would really care.eastcoastcal said:Big C said:
What if they weren't "ivies", but just schools in the west? Start with the former Pac schools that didn't go to the "B1G": WSU, OSU, the Arizonas. Maybe Colorado and Utah (maybe not). Nevada, UNLV, maybe UC Davis, Boise St, SDSU. Sac St? Air Force? We play Stanfurd every year as our last game. The top teams from this "lesser Pac" conference would go to some sort of piss ant bowl game.
I don't know exactly, but some combination of some of the above schools.
Sure, recruiting would drop off a bit, as would quality of play. But probably not all that much. I really don't see how it would be all that much different than what we've been doing, except no LA schools, no UW or Oregon.
Our TV deal would be absolutely terrible with these teams and we'd have to fold many, many sports as a result
What we'd have to do is come up with a new model for the other sports, one that wasn't dependent on subsidies from football revenue. If we value the experience that these student athletes get from competing, we find a way to fund them. Or we eliminate them.