End of Pac12? - 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: End of Pac12? (/thread-23271.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: End of Pac12? (/thread-23271.html)
RE: End of Pac12? - thatboy - 07-23-2022
(07-23-2022, 10:49 AM)BostonCard Wrote: Stanford would probably have to replace about $20 million if it dropped football or moved to a lower division (lower revenue but also, presumably, lower costs). That’s a drop in the bucket compared to annual donations to Stanford, which exceed $1 billion (with a b).
BC
I don't have a strong opinion about whether or not Stanford should drop football. But if it does, I really hope the Board of Trustees, or whoever controls the budget, sees fit to pony up the ~$20M. I can live without football (though I'd like to keep it), but I think elite sports is not just part of Stanford's identity, but part of it's value proposition. It sets Stanford apart from MIT, Caltech, Carnegie Mellon, etc. No offense to excellent schools like that, but in my mind there's more to university life than books and research. Stanford is special because it's a well rounded institution that attracts more than just eggheads -- but people who excel in all aspects of life and go on to leadership positions. Excellence in sports is integral to that.
Relatively speaking, $20M is very manageable. Stanford has the money. It's simply a matter of priorities. Willfully abandoning this pillar of excellence would be gross negligence by a school with such a brobdingnagian endowment. (edit: the autocorrect feature of this site is effing up my sentence; I wrote it correctly. Apparently hu'ge gets changed to "of immense proportions". Can someone remove these weird autocorrections? I rarely post here and this is the second time in a row, I think, that it's happened).
RE: End of Pac12? - BostonCard - 07-24-2022
Autocorrecting for “H*ge” is a long story dating back to the Stanford-Texas game in 1999, as I recall. Just roll with it.
The only other autocorrect that still exists on this site is H*isman, due to repeated snubbing of Stanford players. Given that I wouldn’t expect to have a candidate in contention in the near future, maybe we can stop that one.
BC
RE: End of Pac12? - msqueri - 07-24-2022
It's an exceedingly minor inconvenience in my life and really not a big deal at all so I of course will "roll with it" but I'm one who thinks all these autocorrects are stupid. I think it's poor internet etiquette to edit somebody's words without their consent. Obviously these particular autocorrects are silly/inconsequential and don't change the substantive meaning of posts (well, unless somebody views the H.e.i.s.m.a.n as a venerated award that shouldn't be compared to Voldemort). Back in the Bootleg days it would drive me crazy when Jim Rutter would use his editor privileges to add editorial postscripts to other peoples' posts. This board's autocorrect is less of a violation than that but I view it as the same general category of somebody abusing their editorial powers to high-handedly dictate words somebody else can say without being altered with somebody else's words. Personally, I don't give a shit that we got blown out by Texas in 1999 and, in fact, think the embarrassment supercharged one of the greatest Stanford seasons ever up until that point. Yes, I know this board exists because of the stewardship of long-timers who are entitled to inside jokes. I'm not disputing their right to code their software how they want. Don't have to like it though.
RE: End of Pac12? - CompSci87 - 07-24-2022
A little more on the CardBoard's 23 year old running joke: https://thecardboard.org/faq/#board
Yvonne still likes it, so I don't think it's going away.
RE: End of Pac12? - ca245 - 07-24-2022
Do people think we will be able to keep competing at a high level in non-revenue sports such as WSoc, WVB, WBB, MSoc, MWP, WWP, SB, BB, MSw, WSw if we drop to a lower division/lesser conference (assuming for the sake of discussion that there are no monetary issues about supporting such sports). Some elite athletes may choose to come here because of academics, but others may shy away because they want to compete against top teams in the ACC, SEC, and BIG. Will recruiting suffer?
Could Stanford play football in a lower division/lesser conference, but compete in non-revenue sports in a major conference, a sort of "reverse Notre Dame"?
RE: End of Pac12? - 2006alum - 07-24-2022
Who knew a little long-standing autocorrect would lead to such discontent of immense proportions. Personally, I've always found it pretty amusing. Maybe it's time for me to renew my lobbying effort to autocorrect USC to U$C. If ever that moniker applied, it's been in the past month...
RE: End of Pac12? - Goose - 07-24-2022
I regard the auto correct as merely keys on the keyboard. It is part of the language spoken on the Cardboard, which is English with a few alterations. We used to have emoji. We don't now. The language evolves.
RE: End of Pac12? - BostonCard - 07-24-2022
(07-24-2022, 01:41 PM)ca245 Wrote: Do people think we will be able to keep competing at a high level in non-revenue sports such as WSoc, WVB, WBB, MSoc, MWP, WWP, SB, BB, MSw, WSw if we drop to a lower division/lesser conference (assuming for the sake of discussion that there are no monetary issues about supporting such sports). Some elite athletes may choose to come here because of academics, but others may shy away because they want to compete against top teams in the ACC, SEC, and BIG. Will recruiting suffer?
Could Stanford play football in a lower division/lesser conference, but compete in non-revenue sports in a major conference, a sort of "reverse Notre Dame"?
UConn does well in women’s basketball despite being in a marginal conference. Villanova and Gonzaga do well in men’s basketball despite not having BCS football teams.
BC
RE: End of Pac12? - Softball Fan - 07-24-2022
(07-24-2022, 06:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(07-24-2022, 01:41 PM)ca245 Wrote: Do people think we will be able to keep competing at a high level in non-revenue sports such as WSoc, WVB, WBB, MSoc, MWP, WWP, SB, BB, MSw, WSw if we drop to a lower division/lesser conference (assuming for the sake of discussion that there are no monetary issues about supporting such sports). Some elite athletes may choose to come here because of academics, but others may shy away because they want to compete against top teams in the ACC, SEC, and BIG. Will recruiting suffer?
Could Stanford play football in a lower division/lesser conference, but compete in non-revenue sports in a major conference, a sort of "reverse Notre Dame"?
UConn does well in women’s basketball despite being in a marginal conference. Villanova and Gonzaga do well in men’s basketball despite not having BCS football teams.
BC
You might be citing the few exceptions that prove the rule. Most teams in marginal conferences are not in contention for national championships.
WVB is one sport I know about. There is no doubt in my mind that Stanford moving out of the PAC-12 into a lesser conference would adversely impact recruiting. There would still be the occasional elite athlete going to Stanford for the academics but in general elite athletes in WVB want to play in a conference known for competitive volleyball.
Stanford WVB might be better off going independent than joining a marginal conference. It would be difficult scheduling matches around other conference schedules but it would be doable.
RE: End of Pac12? - Mick - 07-24-2022
(07-24-2022, 07:08 PM)paloalto Wrote:(07-24-2022, 06:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(07-24-2022, 01:41 PM)ca245 Wrote: Do people think we will be able to keep competing at a high level in non-revenue sports such as WSoc, WVB, WBB, MSoc, MWP, WWP, SB, BB, MSw, WSw if we drop to a lower division/lesser conference (assuming for the sake of discussion that there are no monetary issues about supporting such sports). Some elite athletes may choose to come here because of academics, but others may shy away because they want to compete against top teams in the ACC, SEC, and BIG. Will recruiting suffer?
Could Stanford play football in a lower division/lesser conference, but compete in non-revenue sports in a major conference, a sort of "reverse Notre Dame"?
UConn does well in women’s basketball despite being in a marginal conference. Villanova and Gonzaga do well in men’s basketball despite not having BCS football teams.
BC
You might be citing the few exceptions that prove the rule. Most teams in marginal conferences are not in contention for national championships.
WVB is one sport I know about. There is no doubt in my mind that Stanford moving out of the PAC-12 into a lesser conference would adversely impact recruiting. There would still be the occasional elite athlete going to Stanford for the academics but in general elite athletes in WVB want to play in a conference known for competitive volleyball.
Stanford WVB might be better off going independent than joining a marginal conference. It would be difficult scheduling matches around other conference schedules but it would be doable.
As for MVB, there are no second-tier conferences in the West. There's the traditional MPSF (Mountain Pacific Sports Federation) which split into two conferences, the MPSF and the Big West. It's almost all big D1 programs with a few recent upstarts. Otherwise, there's the MIVA (Midwestern with Ball State, Loyola, Ohio State, Lewis, etc.) and EIVA (Eastern, with Penn State, George Mason, Hahvahd, Princeton, Rutgers, NYU, St. Francis)
Then there's smaller conferences (Carolinas, NEC/Northeastern and SIAC/Southern). About a dozen independents.
RE: End of Pac12? - chrisk - 07-24-2022
(07-24-2022, 07:08 PM)paloalto Wrote:(07-24-2022, 06:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(07-24-2022, 01:41 PM)ca245 Wrote: Do people think we will be able to keep competing at a high level in non-revenue sports such as WSoc, WVB, WBB, MSoc, MWP, WWP, SB, BB, MSw, WSw if we drop to a lower division/lesser conference (assuming for the sake of discussion that there are no monetary issues about supporting such sports). Some elite athletes may choose to come here because of academics, but others may shy away because they want to compete against top teams in the ACC, SEC, and BIG. Will recruiting suffer?
Could Stanford play football in a lower division/lesser conference, but compete in non-revenue sports in a major conference, a sort of "reverse Notre Dame"?
UConn does well in women’s basketball despite being in a marginal conference. Villanova and Gonzaga do well in men’s basketball despite not having BCS football teams.
BC
You might be citing the few exceptions that prove the rule. Most teams in marginal conferences are not in contention for national championships.
WVB is one sport I know about. There is no doubt in my mind that Stanford moving out of the PAC-12 into a lesser conference would adversely impact recruiting. There would still be the occasional elite athlete going to Stanford for the academics but in general elite athletes in WVB want to play in a conference known for competitive volleyball.
Stanford WVB might be better off going independent than joining a marginal conference. It would be difficult scheduling matches around other conference schedules but it would be doable.
Do you think the Pac-12 would kick Stanford out if it didn't field a football team?
(07-24-2022, 06:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(07-24-2022, 01:41 PM)ca245 Wrote: Do people think we will be able to keep competing at a high level in non-revenue sports such as WSoc, WVB, WBB, MSoc, MWP, WWP, SB, BB, MSw, WSw if we drop to a lower division/lesser conference (assuming for the sake of discussion that there are no monetary issues about supporting such sports). Some elite athletes may choose to come here because of academics, but others may shy away because they want to compete against top teams in the ACC, SEC, and BIG. Will recruiting suffer?
Could Stanford play football in a lower division/lesser conference, but compete in non-revenue sports in a major conference, a sort of "reverse Notre Dame"?
UConn does well in women’s basketball despite being in a marginal conference. Villanova and Gonzaga do well in men’s basketball despite not having BCS football teams.
BC
Note that Fordham and Georgetown are in the Atlantic 10 and Big East Conferences, respectively, but play football in the Patriot League. Of course, their main conferences don't sponsor football, but they have found a way to play football at a lower level than their basketball teams.
RE: End of Pac12? - Softball Fan - 07-30-2022
Realignment; over or not over?
https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/no-pac-12-school-is-joining-the-big-12-pac-12-commish-efforts-to-save-a-conference-on-the-brink/
It's clear that he [Kliavkoff] and Big Ten commissioner Kevin Warren haven't spoken since before the raid.
"We're not scheduled to talk in the future," Kliavkoff said sternly.
He [Kliavkoff] hasn't spoken to the CEOs at USC and UCLA since they called matter-of-factly the day after word leaked to inform him of their schools' departure.
Asked directly about committing to the league with a binding grant of rights, Oregon AD Rob Mullens said he would have to study the landscape, including future College Football Playoff expansion.
RE: End of Pac12? - Canalejas - 07-30-2022
USC President Carol Folt ‘shut down’ potential Pac-12 expansion plans last year
https://www.latimes.com/sports/story/2022-07-29/usc-president-carol-folt-pac-12-expansion
RE: End of Pac12? - 81alum - 07-31-2022
(07-30-2022, 11:37 PM)Canalejas Wrote: USC President Carol Folt ‘shut down’ potential Pac-12 expansion plans last yearDid I really need one more reason to hate USC? Not only do they betray a century of tradition and leave to play in a midwestern conference, but before they do they undermine the Pac-12's future expansion. Sheesh.
https://www.latimes.com/sports/story/2022-07-29/usc-president-carol-folt-pac-12-expansion
RE: End of Pac12? - chrisk - 07-31-2022
Where will the PAC media days be held going forward?
RE: End of Pac12? - MVDan - 07-31-2022
(07-31-2022, 08:25 AM)chrisk Wrote: Where will the PAC media days be held going forward?
Vegas baby...
RE: End of Pac12? - gailtate - 08-01-2022
(07-31-2022, 07:47 AM)81alum Wrote:(07-30-2022, 11:37 PM)Canalejas Wrote: USC President Carol Folt ‘shut down’ potential Pac-12 expansion plans last yearDid I really need one more reason to hate USC? Not only do they betray a century of tradition and leave to play in a midwestern conference, but before they do they undermine the Pac-12's future expansion. Sheesh.
https://www.latimes.com/sports/story/2022-07-29/usc-president-carol-folt-pac-12-expansion
Who would want to join the Pac12? I'm reminded of the old line attributed to Groucho Marx: "I wouldn't want to be in any club that would have me for a member".
RE: End of Pac12? - Giants - 08-01-2022
I am glad Folt shut down the conversation. Once TX and OK joined the SEC, the Big 12 had nothing to offer that would have enhanced Pac10 football. Of course, I guess there are some who would relish the notion of traveling to Lubbock to see their team play or race to their home stadium to watch Iowa State play
RE: End of Pac12? - OutsiderFan - 08-01-2022
You guys are right, Larry Scott is terrible at his job.
https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/status/1554114729521594368
Oh, wait, he's not in charge anymore you say? Was he in charge when the Pac-12 voted against expanding the CFP? Nope, wasn't on the job then either.
MAYBE, and work with me here, those who oversee the Commissioner are the real reason the Pac-12 has imploded.
RE: End of Pac12? - Phogge - 08-01-2022
Sitting in front of the tube in 1999 I thought, "What a gargantuan, humiliating, dominant, otherworldly performance by the Longhorns."
It was simply.... huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuge.