The CardBoard
Two relevant SI headlines of note... - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Two relevant SI headlines of note... (/thread-24322.html)


Two relevant SI headlines of note... - AlbanyCardinal - 08-06-2023

https://www.si.com/extra-mustard/2023/08/06/stanford-pac-12-collapse-uninspiring-statement

https://www.si.com/college/2023/08/06/potential-power-five-exclusion-stanford-cal-team-usa-olympics

RE: Two relevant SI headlines of note... - GK3 - 08-06-2023

(08-06-2023, 01:19 PM)branner Wrote:  Both articles raise valid points. Stanford is the most accomplished university in the country in athletics, and a major contributor to U.S. Olympic success. It does not appear to have lifted a finger to prevent the collapse of its conference.

Big question, though: how do we know that the other Power Five conferences spurned Stanford? Has there been any on-the-record reporting to that effect? For all we know, the Big 10 may have opened the door to Stanford, only to have Stanford either decline the invitation or make unreasonable demands.

I trust neither Muir's nor MTL's competence to deal with this challenge. That the board did so reflects poorly on the board.

Agree completely!.  Sad thing is that the University has issued one mealy mouthed statement which basically says nothing.

RE: Two relevant SI headlines of note... - chrisk - 08-06-2023

(08-06-2023, 01:19 PM)branner Wrote:  Both articles raise valid points. Stanford is the most accomplished university in the country in athletics, and a major contributor to U.S. Olympic success. It does not appear to have lifted a finger to prevent the collapse of its conference.

Big question, though: how do we know that the other Power Five conferences spurned Stanford? Has there been any on-the-record reporting to that effect? For all we know, the Big 10 may have opened the door to Stanford, only to have Stanford either decline the invitation or make unreasonable demands.

I trust neither Muir's nor MTL's competence to deal with this challenge. That the board did so reflects poorly on the board.

The Big 10 struggled to get Fox to come up with half shares for UW and UO. I would guess that there is little money left for Stsnford.

RE: Two relevant SI headlines of note... - AlbanyCardinal - 08-06-2023

You've every right to ask this question, b/c I think most of us know that Stanford's admin, including Muir, is fairly capable of sabotaging Stanford athletics. Goes without saying I know absolutely nothing first hand, but on this point everything I've read suggests that the B1G prioritized the Pac's socal schools and then Oregon/UW. Plus, I think we'd have heard grumbling from some at cal had Stanford nixed any deal. 

(08-06-2023, 01:19 PM)branner Wrote:  Both articles raise valid points. Stanford is the most accomplished university in the country in athletics, and a major contributor to U.S. Olympic success. It does not appear to have lifted a finger to prevent the collapse of its conference.

Big question, though: how do we know that the other Power Five conferences spurned Stanford? Has there been any on-the-record reporting to that effect? For all we know, the Big 10 may have opened the door to Stanford, only to have Stanford either decline the invitation or make unreasonable demands.

I trust neither Muir's nor MTL's competence to deal with this challenge. That the board did so reflects poorly on the board.


RE: Two relevant SI headlines of note... - chrisk - 08-06-2023

(08-06-2023, 01:19 PM)branner Wrote:  Both articles raise valid points. Stanford is the most accomplished university in the country in athletics, and a major contributor to U.S. Olympic success. It does not appear to have lifted a finger to prevent the collapse of its conference.

Big question, though: how do we know that the other Power Five conferences spurned Stanford? Has there been any on-the-record reporting to that effect? For all we know, the Big 10 may have opened the door to Stanford, only to have Stanford either decline the invitation or make unreasonable demands.

I trust neither Muir's nor MTL's competence to deal with this challenge. That the board did so reflects poorly on the board.

The Big 10 struggled to get Fox to come up with half shares for UW and UO. I would guess that there is little money left for Stanford.

RE: Two relevant SI headlines of note... - JimD84 - 08-06-2023

(08-06-2023, 02:22 PM)AlbanyCardinal Wrote:  on this point everything I've read suggests that the B1G prioritized the Pac's socal schools and then Oregon/UW

Umm... No disagreement about USC/UCLA, but what I read about that latest change is that the B1G presidents wanted Stanford (and to a lesser extent Cal), but Fox wanted Oregon. 

Fox has been a serious villain in this business, and I'm hoping that there's something actionable.  They have pulled levers behind the scenes to destabilize the situation.  As Wilner says in one of his articles, they were the outside entity that is most to blame for the collapse of the Pac.

RE: Two relevant SI headlines of note... - SamuelMcF - 08-06-2023

SI. No thanks.

RE: Two relevant SI headlines of note... - AlbanyCardinal - 08-06-2023

Oh, i didn't realize you disliked SI. JK.

(08-06-2023, 04:55 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:  SI. No thanks.
Interesting.

(08-06-2023, 04:49 PM)JimD84 Wrote:  
(08-06-2023, 02:22 PM)AlbanyCardinal Wrote:  on this point everything I've read suggests that the B1G prioritized the Pac's socal schools and then Oregon/UW

Umm... No disagreement about USC/UCLA, but what I read about that latest change is that the B1G presidents wanted Stanford (and to a lesser extent Cal), but Fox wanted Oregon. 

Fox has been a serious villain in this business, and I'm hoping that there's something actionable.  They have pulled levers behind the scenes to destabilize the situation.  As Wilner says in one of his articles, they were the outside entity that is most to blame for the collapse of the Pac.


RE: Two relevant SI headlines of note... - chrisk - 08-06-2023

Not sure what Fox could be liable for since Pac-12 had no agreement past next year and the Fox deal begins in 2024.

What could the damages and remedy be?

RE: Two relevant SI headlines of note... - BobK - 08-07-2023

MTL should not be allowed to ride into the sunset. Clean out his office now send him out to pasture else where

RE: Two relevant SI headlines of note... - pcgoode - 08-07-2023

FWIW, on Sirius XM this morning Rick Neuheisel predicted Stanford would go independent for a number of years and then join whatever conference Notre Dame does in due course.