Pac-12 Expansion - Printable Version

Pac-12 Expansion - 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: Pac-12 Expansion (/thread-25104.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

RE: Pac-12 Expansion - TrumpCard - 09-12-2024

For the Pac conference: Traveling large distances doesn't make sense, especially for non-revenue sports. These are regional schools that don't have big athletic dept budgets. They should add regional schools in good TV markets. UNLV and SJSU fit the mold.

For Stanford: The $36 billion endowment and the university's world class reputation mean never having to be in a conference like the new Pac. If the ACC doesn't work out, then Stanford will have opportunities to join the B1G or maybe a quality conference that doesn't yet exist. I'd rather see Stanford drop athletics than compete in the new version of the Pac.

RE: Pac-12 Expansion - martyup - 09-12-2024

(09-12-2024, 06:46 PM)French Rage Wrote: If the Pac-12 is alive again, does this mean USC can stop its search for the real killer?

[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia3.giphy.com%2Fmedi...ipo=images]

RE: Pac-12 Expansion - Giants - 09-12-2024

(09-12-2024, 06:33 PM)jacket3ree Wrote: I'd rather be in a smaller conference with full round-robin scheduling, that feeds the national playoff. The reconstituted Pac should have that with at least G5/6/whatever status and they should litigate their way back to P5, so I'd prefer to be in a West Coast conference with Cal. (Cal was going wherever Stanford dragged it.)

It will be interesting to see if Stanford regrets taking a of immense proportions pay cut to join the ACC. But good to know Kentucky is in conference now. Not too hard to beat in football and sort of overrated in hoops.

Notre Dame also needs to get off their independent football ass and go full-in on the ACC. I'm sure they have a special playoff carve out, but it's BS.

Kentucky is in the SEC

ND will remain independent now that they have signed a new deal with NBC. The bad news for the Irish? Since they are not in a conference, they are not eligible for a first round bye in the CFP. Only the four highest ranked conference champions will received byes.

Per a number of commentaries that I read today suggested the new P12 will not be considered for “autonomous” conference (aka: P4) status. Instead, the thinking on the part of OSU and WSU was to put themselves in a position to earn a CFP berth via “highest ranked conference champion” among the G6 group. Unless the Beavs and Cougars are members of an 8 or more member conference, their chances for a CFP invitation are virtually nil. The TV payout for the new P12 will not be significantly greater than that which the MWC currently receives.

RE: Pac-12 Expansion - 82lsju - 09-12-2024

(09-12-2024, 08:15 PM)Giants Wrote:
(09-12-2024, 06:33 PM)jacket3ree Wrote: I'd rather be in a smaller conference with full round-robin scheduling, that feeds the national playoff. The reconstituted Pac should have that with at least G5/6/whatever status and they should litigate their way back to P5, so I'd prefer to be in a West Coast conference with Cal. (Cal was going wherever Stanford dragged it.)

It will be interesting to see if Stanford regrets taking a of immense proportions pay cut to join the ACC. But good to know Kentucky is in conference now. Not too hard to beat in football and sort of overrated in hoops.

Notre Dame also needs to get off their independent football ass and go full-in on the ACC. I'm sure they have a special playoff carve out, but it's BS.

Kentucky is in the SEC

ND will remain independent now that they have signed a new deal with NBC. The bad news for the Irish? Since they are not in a conference, they are not eligible for a first round bye in the CFP. Only the four highest ranked conference champions will received byes.

Per a number of commentaries that I read today suggested the new P12 will not be considered for “autonomous” conference (aka: P4) status. Instead, the thinking on the part of OSU and WSU was to put themselves in a position to earn a CFP berth via “highest ranked conference champion” among the G6 group. Unless the Beavs and Cougars are members of an 8 or more member conference, their chances for a CFP invitation are virtually nil. The TV payout for the new P12 will not be significantly greater than that which the MWC currently receives.

they also want to preserve the NCAA basketball payout from past Pac 12 conference performance

RE: Pac-12 Expansion - StanUSwagU - 09-13-2024

(09-12-2024, 06:33 PM)jacket3ree Wrote: I'd rather be in a smaller conference with full round-robin scheduling, that feeds the national playoff. The reconstituted Pac should have that with at least G5/6/whatever status and they should litigate their way back to P5, so I'd prefer to be in a West Coast conference with Cal. (Cal was going wherever Stanford dragged it.)

It will be interesting to see if Stanford regrets taking a of immense proportions pay cut to join the ACC. But good to know Kentucky is in conference now. Not too hard to beat in football and sort of overrated in hoops.

Notre Dame also needs to get off their independent football ass and go full-in on the ACC. I'm sure they have a special playoff carve out, but it's BS.

[[[ Hi Jacket3ree, hope all is well. Just to clarify, I think above you mention that 'Kentucky is in conference now'; If this was meant to mean that 'the University of Kentucky Wildcats' are in conference (the ACC)' this not the case. Kentucky (the University of Kentucky Wildcats, famous for basketball where Coach John Calipari used to coach) is in the SEC not the ACC. On the other hand Louisville (which is in the State of Kentucky) is in the ACC. Just thought I would clarify. My opinion about this overall thread, is that it was a good decision for StanU to join the ACC, over some reconstituted Pac12. The passion in the ACC for Football & Mens Basketball will incentivize & drive Stanford to 'change its lazy, laissez-faire attitude towards Football, Mens Basketball, Overly restrictive Admissions Requirements, & NIL" ...which are things we have been 'stuck in our old ways at Stanford' for way too long ! " ]]]

RE: Pac-12 Expansion - Spiny_Norman - 09-13-2024

(09-12-2024, 06:33 PM)jacket3ree Wrote: It will be interesting to see if Stanford regrets taking a of immense proportions pay cut to join the ACC.

I might say that a bit differently. "It will be interesting to see if the Stanford Board of Trustees regrets subsidizing Athletics to the tune of $280M over the next 7-9 years to enable the teams to have a Power 4 affiliation and continue to compete at the highest level."

Stanford agreed to the cut in its share of the Tier 1 media rights because the BoT agreed to make them whole (more or less). It's a big commitment.

And whatever conference might be re-constituted is still going to be at the mercy of whatever ESPN or Fox will pay them. It seems to me more likely than not that ESPN, Fox, the B10 and SEC create a Premier League of college football with everyone else, including the ACC and Big 12, being relegated to mid major money.

RE: Pac-12 Expansion - Goose - 09-13-2024

(09-13-2024, 01:48 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote: It seems to me more likely than not that ESPN, Fox, the B10 and SEC create a Premier League of college football with everyone else, including the ACC and Big 12, being relegated to mid major money.

I agree with this analysis. Exactly who will be in the "Premier League" is something that will work itself out. I am sure that several B10 teams an possibly a few SEC teams will not be in it. Possibly some of the the schools who are not "selected" can then reconstitute a system that resembles College Athletics as we once new it. Mid major money at that point may be very small potatoes.

RE: Pac-12 Expansion - paloalto - 09-13-2024

(09-13-2024, 07:43 AM)StanUSwagU Wrote: The passion in the ACC for Football & Mens Basketball will incentivize & drive Stanford to 'change its lazy, laissez-faire attitude towards Football, Mens Basketball, Overly restrictive Admissions Requirements, & NIL" ...which are things we have been 'stuck in our old ways at Stanford' for way too long ! " ]]]

I pretty much agree with your comment except what I have put in bold letters. From my viewpoint Stanford is a decent academic institution, more so than a football factory. I prefer to keep the admissions requirements the same.

RE: Pac-12 Expansion - jacket3ree - 09-13-2024

I've been a fan of an ACC school for 43 years. I know Kentucky is not in the conference. Just an ill-advised attempt on my part to give Mick unnecessary grief over including Kentucky in his list with Duke, UNC, Louisville, Wake, BC, and Da U. What might be obvious on the next barstool isn't always obvious online.

RE: Pac-12 Expansion - needle - 09-13-2024

Just going to throw this out there: there is nothing I know of that would prevent Stanford from charging each and every student an athletics fee supporting the AD's budget. Many, many public universities rely heavily on student fees to prop up their athletic departments.

https://www.sportico.com/leagues/college-sports/2024/james-madison-student-fees-athletics-million-1234771980/

RE: Pac-12 Expansion - Mick - 09-13-2024

(09-13-2024, 05:10 PM)jacket3ree Wrote: I've been a fan of an ACC school for 43 years. I know Kentucky is not in the conference. Just an ill-advised attempt on my part to give Mick unnecessary grief over including Kentucky in his list with Duke, UNC, Louisville, Wake, BC, and Da U. What might be obvious on the next barstool isn't always obvious online.

Yeah, I know. Wishful thinking on my part, plus I was with a firm that had quite a few UK ties.

RE: Pac-12 Expansion - Snorlax94 - 09-13-2024

(09-12-2024, 09:40 AM)gocard14 Wrote: Anyone else feeling a twinge of regret?

If we could have convinced Cal to stay with us, we'd have an 8 team conference that is geographically friendly. It would also be composed entirely of schools with a history of being sneaky good at football. There would be no juggernauts, but all 8 schools historically have been at or around mid power-5 level or better for the last few decades.

I can't say what the money would be. I'm sure it would be less then the ACC, though the penalties we took to leave the PAC and join the ACC may mitigate that somewhat.

If the ACC collapses in the next round when FSU and clemson bolt pending their litigation, I wouldn't be shocked if we came back hat in hand.

This is what I wished Stanford had done a year ago — reconstituted the Pac 8 with basically these exact schools and Cal.

I hear the arguments about recruiting but I feel like the pac-8 would have endured. And Stanford is a national brand no matter whom they play. And Wouldn’t the league retain Power-5 status in terms of tv contracts and money, and arguably, the 12 school cfp?

But like many others are saying — I don’t see anything as permanent in college football. The ACC seemed like a doable landing pad for now and who knows that college sports will be be like in 4 years.

RE: Pac-12 Expansion - Mudhead - 09-13-2024

(09-13-2024, 08:41 PM)Snorlax94 Wrote:
(09-12-2024, 09:40 AM)gocard14 Wrote: Anyone else feeling a twinge of regret?

If we could have convinced Cal to stay with us, we'd have an 8 team conference that is geographically friendly. It would also be composed entirely of schools with a history of being sneaky good at football. There would be no juggernauts, but all 8 schools historically have been at or around mid power-5 level or better for the last few decades.

I can't say what the money would be. I'm sure it would be less then the ACC, though the penalties we took to leave the PAC and join the ACC may mitigate that somewhat.

If the ACC collapses in the next round when FSU and clemson bolt pending their litigation, I wouldn't be shocked if we came back hat in hand.

This is what I wished Stanford had done a year ago — reconstituted the Pac 8 with basically these exact schools and Cal.

I hear the arguments about recruiting but I feel like the pac-8 would have endured. And Stanford is a national brand no matter whom they play. And Wouldn’t the league retain Power-5 status in terms of tv contracts and money, and arguably, the 12 school cfp?

But like many others are saying — I don’t see anything as permanent in college football. The ACC seemed like a doable landing pad for now and who knows that college sports will be be like in 4 years.

I can’t prove what would have been to be sure. But the PAC something you envisage would have been the Mountain West with MW athletes and MW caliber teams. Stanford is a national brand only because it comepetes at the highest level (Power 4) otherwise it’s just another Ivy with better weather. Take a look at Hambys reaction to the travel schedule … something like “it’s a pain but for a while I was afraid we wouldn’t be in a major conference at all “ (that’s my paraphrase, not a literal quote). We wouldn’t get top level coaches or top level players . Stanford is unique because it is a top notch academic institution playing in in top conferences for major sports. A lot of schools have proved you can have medium academics, or worse, and a big time conference and get top athletes. No one has proven a high quality degree is valued more than top level competition by top level athletes.

RE: Pac-12 Expansion - martyup - 09-13-2024

Notre Dame has been able to field top notch athletic teams without any conference affiliation.

Mudhead - Mudhead - 09-13-2024

(09-13-2024, 10:20 PM)martyup Wrote: Notre Dame has been able to field top notch athletic teams without any conference affiliation.

Yes, they do. In one major sport. Yet they found it desirable or necessary to be a a conference for mens and women’s basketball and I think all other major sports. Wonder how much a network would pay for the rights to Stanford Football? We know they wouldn’t pay $30. Million for all sports as part of a conference.NBC is reported to be paying Notre Dame $50m per year for football and tney get $17 M from the ACC for other sports. So that’s $67m per year for athletic TV rights..about what the Big 10 will pay.

Notre Dame is an exception to every rule and probably the only one..but I did not think of their football program. I don’t think we are in the football class any more than I think they are in our academic class. But if someone would pay us even $30 million a year for all of our tv rights, we could look at going the independent route. I doubt that’s out there or we would have grabbed it , but I don’t know that.

RE: Mudhead - 82lsju - 09-14-2024

(09-13-2024, 10:43 PM)Mudhead Wrote:
(09-13-2024, 10:20 PM)martyup Wrote: Notre Dame has been able to field top notch athletic teams without any conference affiliation.

Yes, they do. In one major sport. Yet they found it desirable or necessary to be a a conference for mens and women’s basketball and I think all other major sports. Wonder how much a network would pay for the rights to Stanford Football? We know they wouldn’t pay $30. Million for all sports as part of a conference.NBC is reported to be paying Notre Dame $50m per year for football and tney get $17 M from the ACC for other sports. So that’s $67m per year for athletic TV rights..about what the Big 10 will pay.

Notre Dame is an exception to every rule and probably the only one..but I did not think of their football program. I don’t think we are in the football class any more than I think they are in our academic class. But if someone would pay us even $30 million a year for all of our tv rights, we could look at going the independent route. I doubt that’s out there or we would have grabbed it , but I don’t know that.

I don't see their football schedule as truly "independent" given they play five ACC teams in football every year, and currently play us (we'll see if that changes after this year), USC, and Navy every year so they really only have to find four games a year. And in those four games they seem to generally play a Big 10 team each year (Purdue this year) and one other power conference game (Texas A&M this year) and two others, like the mighty Miami RedHawks and the Northern Illinois Huskies (they probably regret scheduling them...) this year

of course even back when I was growing up in Ohio my vague recollection is that their "independent" schedule seemed to include a lot of Big 10 teams each year as well as Navy and often one of Army and Air Force.

RE: Pac-12 Expansion - Mick - 09-14-2024

(09-13-2024, 10:20 PM)martyup Wrote: Notre Dame has been able to field top notch athletic teams without any conference affiliation.

They have millions of subway alumni, so to speak. The country is about 1/4th Catholic, but there's only two Catholic colleges who have D1/FBS football, Notre Dame and Boston College. For whatever reason, Notre Dame has a history of success (5th most wins all-time) and BC has far fewer, so ND captures their attention and gives ND the support of many, many non-alums.

RE: Pac-12 Expansion - Hurlburt88 - 09-14-2024

NOtre dame has played Purdue and MSU almost every year of my life, and Michigan many as well. So a lot of history with at least a few BIG 10 teams.

and may of their subway alumni are non-catholic. ACtually my father, an ND alum, always felt there was too much emphasis on football which distracted and detracted from the University; his brother had a scholarship offer to play hoops at ND, and my dad advised him to go elsewhere where my uncle could have more academic and athletic balance

RE: Pac-12 Expansion - PDX Card - 09-16-2024

Being a fan of West Coast football, I am glad to see the PAC continuing on. However, I don't think Stanford would have any interest in rejoining it should the ACC implode. And I don't think there is any way that UO, UW, UCLA, and that other school down south that should not be named will ever return to the PAC. Those are the schools that Stanford should be playing, and in any further disruption, Stanford will look/lobby hard for inclusion in the BIG.

RE: Pac-12 Expansion - James Dean - 09-17-2024

(09-16-2024, 03:56 PM)PDX Card Wrote: Being a fan of West Coast football, I am glad to see the PAC continuing on. However, I don't think Stanford would have any interest in rejoining it should the ACC implode. And I don't think there is any way that UO, UW, UCLA, and that other school down south that should not be named will ever return to the PAC. Those are the schools that Stanford should be playing, and in any further disruption, Stanford will look/lobby hard for inclusion in the BIG.

I can't follow this discussion.

Not counting football (and, yes, I know - lots of people think that's all that counts) the ACC is the strongest conference in the country. It won more Olympic medals by far, for example.

Academically it is the best conference (again, I recognize that many view this as irrelevant.)

The reason some want us in the BiG is for the TV money. But we have more money than anyone. We ought not to prostitute ourselves.

Yet the big flaw in this reasoning is the assumption that the BiG would be foolish enough to pay us tens of millions more for our TV rights than they are worth. Not gonna happen.