Stanford to the ACC? - 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: Stanford to the ACC? (/thread-24323.html)
+- 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: Stanford to the ACC? (/thread-24323.html)
RE: Stanford to the ACC? - ColoradoTree - 08-07-2023
Principle No. 1: Keeping the Pac-12 together was preferable in all respects. Regional rivalries, good competition, limited burden on student-athletes. Woulda loved to keep it together. But we can't have that, obviously. So, of the available, realistic options that keep funding our athletic department at a decent level, it would seem to be down to (1) join the Big 12, or (2) join the ACC. Would've loved the Big Ten along with Cal/USC/UCLA/UW/UO, but that doesn't seem to be an option either. Given that choice, I think the ACC is far, far preferable.
Let's think about how this works for most sports. For football, it's fine. It's still a there-and-back trip for four weeks a year. But
Instead of flying 2-3 hours to Seattle, Phoenix, Denver, Salt Lake, etc. (which would have been my strong preference), we'd be flying 5-6 hours to Raleigh-Durham, Richmond, Miami, Atlanta, etc. That's not insignificant! It's a real burden, but it's frustrating that football is the sport driving all of this change while it's the sport that will see the fewest additional burdens. And it's not all that different to fly to those cities than it would have been to fly to Cincinnati, Orlando, Morgantown, Des Moines, Houston, or Kansas City.
And just thinking about competition levels for the non-football/basketball sports I care about:
Baseball: The ACC is a fantastic baseball conference. Yes, the travel would be brutal. They play approximately 30 conference games, split up into ten 3-game series, so that's 5 cross-country road trips. It sucks. But the competition would be terrific. And by contrast, the Big Ten and the Big 12 are middling baseball conferences. The SEC is king right now, but the ACC isn't that far behind with several perennial Top 25 programs like Wake, UVA, Duke, Miami, etc. Big Ten baseball is mid.
Women's Tennis: While the SEC has made a run, the ACC is still the top conference in the country for me. UNC, Duke, UVA, NC State, Miami, Georgia Tech. I mean, my goodness. Big Ten women's tennis is mid. (UCLA and USC are immediately going to be the class of that conference.) And yes, travel is going to be awful. Right now, the ACC has 14 schools that sponsor women's tennis, and they play a true round-robin of 13 matches. With Stanford and Cal, that would be 16. Do they go to 15 conference matches? If so, that's four road trips to get 7-8 matches. You could build around Spring Break and do, say, Duke/UNC one weekend and Wake/NC State the following weekend. But no doubt, it's bad. But it would've been bad in the Big Ten or Big 12, but with the 5-hour flights being more like 4-hour flights.
And my goodness, what a good swimming conference that would be, and I don't see that scheduling would have to change much that way--we could still have regional duals and nationwide invitationals like usual, though the flight to ACCs would be crappier than the flight to Pac-12s, of course. MPSF type sports like water polo, men's volleyball, men's gymnastics would seem to be unaffected. But for the all the other team sports that play games/matches against single opponents at a time, yeah, the travel is gonna suck. But it would've sucked in the Big Ten and Big 12, too. Bad travel is a given of all options that see Stanford continue to exist in a major conference. (I certainly recognize we don't all share that goal, of course.)
Random thought: Uh, we'd probably get better recruiting in lacrosse and field hockey?
RE: Stanford to the ACC? - Jamesy - 08-07-2023
(08-07-2023, 02:22 PM)crazypaco Wrote: Pitt alumni here who used to live out in the Bay area.
First, Pete Thamel is perhaps the most reliable voice in realignment. I doubt he tweets that unless Stanford and Cal are being seriously discussed by the ACC. When you see anyone associated with WVU commenting on realignment, it is not generally reliable information. Several of their bloggers, including the one posted above, have a long track record of just making things up. But when Thamel writes something, from my prior experience with knowing what has gone on with Pitt and what he puts out there, I take it fairly seriously.
Second, this realignment environment and what happened to the Pac is atrocious. No one wants this for the Pac schools, but here we are.
Things to note about the ACC:
UNC-UVA is the power center which is more stable than you'd think. UNC AD came out recently blasting FSU statements. FSU has been a loud malcontent since Bowden left and they have regularly look to place blame for their poor coaching and financial decisions on anyone but themselves. Who knows what FSU might do because they don't seem to be speaking or acting logically, but they'll be cutting a half billion check if they do. Here's an ESPN article on the rest of the conference's reaction: https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/38135996/acc-florida-state-college-football-2023-conference-realignment
That said, the current contracts with ESPN and the ACC Network that run through 2036 will keep the ACC as the third conference in the revenue pecking order, but the gap between the ACC and SEC/Big10 is a serious concern that will continually need to be addressed.
Note that Notre Dame is a full legal member with full voting privileges (except on football matters). They are subject to the same grant-of-rights agreement and exit penalty as everyone else and are contractually bound to play football in the ACC if they decide to have their football program in any conference. However, ND's identity in football is their independence, so don't expect them to ever join a conference unless out of necessity for access to the CFP.
Notre dame must average 5 games against the ACC annually. Some years they play 4 games, some years 6. They do not count in conference standings.
Football currently still only plays an 8 game conference schedule. There is not much initiative within the conference for that to increase because so many schools have annual rivalry games out-of-conference (Clemson-SC; FSU-UF; GT-UGA; UL-UK; Pitt-WVU); plus ND rotating through the conference. If an eight game conference schedule holds, that could leave more flexibility for Stanford and/or Cal to schedule local non-conference games. So for football, there would be no more than 4 away trips across the country in any season (and if Cal was along for the ride, could be as few as 3 every other year).
That said, I have no idea how things will work for any other sports with round robin type of scheduling like hoops, soccer, or volleyball. Perhaps there is only a football arrangement to be made.
Most of the ACC schools are serious about who they academically associate with. The ACC has the highest mean US News ranking in the FBS. There is an ACC Academic Consortium which primarily focuses on undergraduate research and creativity programs (see acciac.org).
Expansion votes in the ACC must pass by a 3/4ths majority.
I have no idea if it would happen or not. Clearly a lot of logistical issues to consider. Also, on the ACC's end, it will primarily depend on the details in the contract between the ACC and ESPN. But I'd personally be happy to have an excuse to fly back out to the Bay area once in a while and to have Stanford and Pitt to play occasionally for a Pop Warner trophy.
If you have any questions, I'm happy to try to answer them. Whatever happens, best of luck.
I also think that we could push to have back to back ACC road games in weeks 0-3 so that the team could stay out east without students missing classes.
RE: Stanford to the ACC? - qwerty49 - 08-07-2023
(08-07-2023, 02:05 PM)StanfordMatt Wrote:(08-07-2023, 01:46 PM)paloalto Wrote:(08-07-2023, 01:29 PM)StanfordMatt Wrote: I’m sorry but how anyone can consider the Atlantic Coast Conference a realistic option is beyond me. No disrespect to other posters, but as someone who travels coast-to-coast regularly for work, it’s a brutal experience. Scheduling extended stay road trips and incorporating school holidays is like the little Dutch boy using his fingers to plug a leaky dike. Imnsho it makes a mockery of the student experience.
I use to fly to the East coast frequently on business. From the time an Olympic sports team gets in a shuttle bus to go to the airport for a commercial flight to the time they check into a hotel, is it really that big a difference whether they are in the air for two or four hours.
I assume you are also against flying to Penn State, Rutgers, and Maryland. What about Olympic sports teams flying to Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, etc in mid/late November?
A couple points...
First, flying from the east coast to the west coast is closer to 5.5-6 hours depending on the city and the availability of direct flights. Flying east is a bit quicker because of the jet stream but the brutal aspect of that direction is the time difference; it's basically a whole day lost to travel.
Second, you're correct - I'm not thrilled about the prospect of our SA's flying to PSU, Rutgers or UMD either. I think everyone can agree that all of the options being discussed are rather absurd. For me, it's a matter of where to draw the line. Travel in the Big 10 wouldn't be great but not quite as extreme as getting to destinations such as Tallahassee and Clemson (2.5 hour drive from closest major airports: ATL or CLT).
I commuted to the Midwest and the East Coast weekly for a decade. It's NOT the flight hours -- it's the time zones and the jet lag and their effect on your body's circadian rhythms. And when you come home on weekends, you really never adjust fully before you have to go back east again. Flying east is a bitch. No other word for it. Melatonin didn't work until I tripled the dose.
The East Coast commute got so bad I stayed over every other weekend -- also was cheaper. Finally the last year I just rented an apartment and had my wife come out to visit me when she could.
RE: Stanford to the ACC? - BobK - 08-07-2023
Thanks Paco and a big welcome back Colorado card
Stanford to the ACC keeps many sports alive. I’m for stayin alive
RE: Stanford to the ACC? - yvonne - 08-07-2023
(08-07-2023, 03:19 PM)BobK Wrote: Thanks Paco and a big welcome back Colorado card
Stanford to the ACC keeps many sports alive. I’m for stayin alive
Ha. ha. ha. ha.
RE: Stanford to the ACC? - BobK - 08-07-2023
Colorado Tree. Lol sorry
RE: Stanford to the ACC? - Giants - 08-07-2023
(08-07-2023, 01:56 PM)AlbanyCardinal Wrote: I can see the point that it makes some sense for the ACC, as you point out, but I don't see how it'd benefit Stanford in any way. You make it seem as if Stanford has only two choices in all this, between the MWC and the ACC. With all its challenges, I'd much rather Stanford start planning out independence (in football) until the right door opens.
(08-07-2023, 01:45 PM)Giants Wrote: A Stanford/Cal (along with OSU/WSU?) move to the ACC makes sense because of the GOR mess and the current extended TV contract. Specifically, bringing in new blood gives the conference (and their TV partner, ESPN) a chance to rip up the GOR and revise the TV deal. This might be enough to placate FSU and Clemson (with a new set of numbers) while adding late night inventory for ESPN.
Heck, even if the refugees from the West don’t receive a full share initially, it would be a heck of a lot better than the paltry payout they would receive from the MWC.
For Stanford, football scheduling could include three conference games v. Cal, OSU, WSU, three road conference games v. old ACC members with two back-to-back and three home conference games v. old ACC members. This would reduce conference travel to two long trips/season. If future non-conference road games were to be scheduled v. western opponents (old P12 members?), the total long trips/season would only increase from one to two.
The hang up is hoops and Olympic sports - admittedly a rather sizable issue to surmount….
As much as the idea of football independence sounds intriguing, it is a financial non-starter. No one is going to pay Stanford “Notre Dame money” and without a check for that amount, the AD would have to slash the number of programs significantly.
The ACC is not an ideal solution but given the alternatives, it is the best one.
RE: Stanford to the ACC? - terry - 08-07-2023
Welcome back, Colorado Tree!
RE: Stanford to the ACC? - AlbanyCardinal - 08-07-2023
I get that it could be challenging, but why do you think Stanford needs ND money to make it work? Has Stanford ever gotten ND money, even as a member of the Pac? I think independence could work if it were temporary, holding out to see how the college football/sports landscape takes shape as the dust settles a bit.
(08-07-2023, 04:29 PM)Giants Wrote:(08-07-2023, 01:56 PM)AlbanyCardinal Wrote: I can see the point that it makes some sense for the ACC, as you point out, but I don't see how it'd benefit Stanford in any way. You make it seem as if Stanford has only two choices in all this, between the MWC and the ACC. With all its challenges, I'd much rather Stanford start planning out independence (in football) until the right door opens.
(08-07-2023, 01:45 PM)Giants Wrote: A Stanford/Cal (along with OSU/WSU?) move to the ACC makes sense because of the GOR mess and the current extended TV contract. Specifically, bringing in new blood gives the conference (and their TV partner, ESPN) a chance to rip up the GOR and revise the TV deal. This might be enough to placate FSU and Clemson (with a new set of numbers) while adding late night inventory for ESPN.
Heck, even if the refugees from the West don’t receive a full share initially, it would be a heck of a lot better than the paltry payout they would receive from the MWC.
For Stanford, football scheduling could include three conference games v. Cal, OSU, WSU, three road conference games v. old ACC members with two back-to-back and three home conference games v. old ACC members. This would reduce conference travel to two long trips/season. If future non-conference road games were to be scheduled v. western opponents (old P12 members?), the total long trips/season would only increase from one to two.
The hang up is hoops and Olympic sports - admittedly a rather sizable issue to surmount….
As much as the idea of football independence sounds intriguing, it is a financial non-starter. No one is going to pay Stanford “Notre Dame money” and without a check for that amount, the AD would have to slash the number of programs significantly.
The ACC is not an ideal solution but given the alternatives, it is the best one.
RE: Stanford to the ACC? - jacket3ree - 08-07-2023
I've stopped worrying about a conference wish list, although a robust Mountain Pacific conference seems best to me. Lock up everything west of the Hundredth Meridian except, well the "Big" guys (bummer), but play them OOC and pretend to be Boise State or Fresno State when you do. It's not the end of the world not to be number one, but have more fun.
That said, I would be of course hugely biased toward some sort of alliance/merger with the ACC. That only really works, however, if it is football only like Notre Dame so that teams with lots of road contests are not perpetually jetlagged. Really bad for health.
Our Pitt friend lays things out really well. UNC runs the ACC. Always has; always will. The thought of them bolting to be small fry elsewhere makes zero sense. Frankly you could replace Louisville, Miami, and Florida State with Stanford (football), Cal (football), and Notre Dame (permanently in football) and that would be a great straight-up trade.
If anyone wants to do some pro bono sleuthing on how iron clad the GOR may or may not be, so I can report it as my own work on an ACC site that is probably buzzing (get it) about this possibility, have at it (only 16 pages): Old Ironclad Florida State's lawyers can supposedly drive a pair of free shoes through it, FWIW. The TLDR version is that any future members are also bound by the agreement. So unless there is an implosion now with the 7 rumored to really want out of the GOR, this would not be a decision to make lightly. GOR lasts until 2036.
RE: Stanford to the ACC? - Canalejas - 08-07-2023
(08-07-2023, 04:53 PM)jacket3ree Wrote: That only really works, however, if it is football only like Notre Dame
ND is actually a full member in everything but football, for which they have that 5-game agreement.
RE: Stanford to the ACC? - footandballtorture - 08-07-2023
As a former athlete all I’ll say is a move to the ACC might “save” Stanford sports but is a logistical nightmare in actual execution. I think Stanford needs to lose the prestige mindset and push for the B1G (if they want to save their football recruiting classes)
RE: Stanford to the ACC? - Softball Fan - 08-07-2023
On ESPN and ACCN they have Stanford/Cal in discussions with ACC on their chyrons. So more than unsupported speculation. Of course that doesn't imply there will be an agreement or even that both sides are really thinking in terms of going through with it.
RE: Stanford to the ACC? - jacket3ree - 08-07-2023
(08-07-2023, 05:23 PM)Canalejas Wrote:(08-07-2023, 04:53 PM)jacket3ree Wrote: That only really works, however, if it is football only like Notre Dame
ND is actually a full member in everything but football, for which they have that 5-game agreement.
Ah, right, I guess it would be the inverse of Notre Dame's arrangement. Notre Dame all in including football with Cal and Stanford football only. I think people forget that Notre Dame is contractually obligated to join the ACC in football if they join a conference. To join the Big Ten, Notre Dame is bound by the GOR and have to pay the exit fee and all their TV loot would be split among the remaining ACC members through 2036. The GOR seems clear - arguments will be 'yeah we know we were stupid to sign it, but it is restraint of trade'. I searched for "venue" in the GOR and didn't find it. Where would a lawsuit take place? Florida or North Carolina?
If ESPN goes under, maybe all bets are off?
Cal and Stanford don't have leverage, so anything might be all or nothing. Get used to the Hartsfield-Jackson and Charlotte-Douglas airports.
RE: Stanford to the ACC? - Softball Fan - 08-07-2023
I've flown commercial from San Jose to Penn State. There would most likely be two layovers with one of them probably a change of planes. Fly into Baltimore or Philadelphia. Take a bus or local charter flight to an airport near State College. A eight to ten hour experience depending on length of layovers.
RE: Stanford to the ACC? - Canalejas - 08-07-2023
(08-07-2023, 05:49 PM)footandballtorture Wrote: As a former athlete all I’ll say is a move to the ACC might “save” Stanford sports but is a logistical nightmare in actual execution. I think Stanford needs to lose the prestige mindset and push for the B1G (if they want to save their football recruiting classes)
I thought the B1G was the prestige mindset option.
RE: Stanford to the ACC? - dabigv13 - 08-07-2023
I'm pretty sure we would sign up for Big 10 in a heartbeat if we were invited, has nothing to do with any mindset of thinking we're above them. But if the media paymasters don't want us, there is no rush on their part. Perhaps after some time and consideration the presidents may decide they'd like us in their company, and make a push to the paymasters to craft a package that gets us in.
That's probably copium though. Ideally this ACC talk is to get some sense of our worth on the market to see how much of a percentage of a full share we could get from B10. I don't think MTL is as wily as the Oregon and UW leaders who probably leaked rumors that they were on board with a surprise Friday signing of the Apple deal last week, before not even showing up to the meeting, maximizing their leverage while deal was still being negotiated with B10.
One funny tweet I saw was that apparently there is big media money for the Pac teams (ESPN for the Big 12 defectors, Fox for the Big 10 defectors, and ESPN in this mooted ACC setup) just not actually in a conference together.
More Friday and Saturday evening slots filled maybe if you disperse the west coast teams.
RE: Stanford to the ACC? - Canalejas - 08-07-2023
Right, there is money after all in watching west coast teams. But only when they're playing east coast teams and/or the results affect the conference standings of east coast teams.
RE: Stanford to the ACC? - Spiny_Norman - 08-07-2023
(08-07-2023, 06:39 PM)Canalejas Wrote: Right, there is money after all in watching west coast teams. But only when they're playing east coast teams and/or the results affect the conference standings of east coast teams.
Or when the West Coast teams play in a time slot not otherwise occupied by Midwest or East Coast teams. How much will ESPN and/or Fox pay for games in that 7:30 PM Pacific time slot? Whether Stanford goes with a conference or is independent, many of their games will probably be scheduled then, at least until the team is more competitive.
RE: Stanford to the ACC? - norcard10 - 08-07-2023
I'm all for the Duke of the West playing the Duke of the East. Irony that two schools on the pacific coast joining the Atlantic Coast Conference is not lost on me.