Stanford to the ACC? - Printable Version

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)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

RE: Stanford to the ACC? - Canalejas - 09-01-2023

(09-01-2023, 10:20 AM)BillBradley Wrote: I seem to be in the minority camp here...Today I have a smile on my face because Stanford just told the whole world "it's important to us to compete at the highest levels." The B10 and B12 were not interested. We were very much stuck. Any move to the MWC or the WCC or whatever Independent/combination solution people were dreaming up would have resulted in the deterioration of so many of our perennial national championship contending teams. While the travel will be onerous, if you asked the players on these teams "which would you prefer - compete in the ACC with more travel or compete against the MWC?", I'm quite certain what the answer would be. Thank goodness we got this done.

I'm pretty happy. Happier than yesterday, for sure.

RE: Stanford to the ACC? - CardinalSagehen - 09-01-2023

(09-01-2023, 10:20 AM)BillBradley Wrote: I seem to be in the minority camp here...Today I have a smile on my face because Stanford just told the whole world "it's important to us to compete at the highest levels." The B10 and B12 were not interested. We were very much stuck. Any move to the MWC or the WCC or whatever Independent/combination solution people were dreaming up would have resulted in the deterioration of so many of our perennial national championship contending teams. While the travel will be onerous, if you asked the players on these teams "which would you prefer - compete in the ACC with more travel or compete against the MWC?", I'm quite certain what the answer would be. Thank goodness we got this done.

I think this is the opinion of most fans, not the minority opinion.

It's just hard not to be miffed that it came to this.

RE: Stanford to the ACC? - ca245 - 09-01-2023

With only a 30% revenue share, will we still have to cut some sports?

RE: Stanford to the ACC? - 82lsju - 09-01-2023

(09-01-2023, 09:00 AM)paloalto Wrote: While travel is a burden, I think the conference will come up with some creative ideas to mitigate it. There has to be compromise in a changing sports landscape. What I'm most concerned about is Cal's financial math to pay for all their Olympic sports.

[twitter]https://twitter.com/PeteThamel/status/1697628039755035116?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1697628039755035116%7Ctwgr%5Ea087be4a44ea4b01d90c561261870331582e8c24%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.espn.com%2Fcollege-football%2Fstory%2F_%2Fid%2F38278920%2Facc-expansion-cal-stanford-smu-answers[/twitter]

So the choice might be home games at home or home games in Dallas.

so SMU gets all home games

RE: Stanford to the ACC? - Vandelay - 09-01-2023

(09-01-2023, 09:52 AM)Nobadeer Wrote: Can you say, Carbon Footprint?

I've noticed a trend of universities establishing satellite campuses. (see: Northeastern satellite campus at what was formerly Mills College). What if Stanford did the same? Establish a satellite campus in ACC country to reduce the travel burden on Stanford athletes.

RE: Stanford to the ACC? - Nobadeer - 09-01-2023

(09-01-2023, 10:31 AM)branner Wrote:
(09-01-2023, 09:52 AM)Nobadeer Wrote: Can you say, Carbon Footprint?

You have just received my vote for Post of the Year. Though the Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability is not amused.

And in the Dept. of Irony, today's Stanford Report touts the 1-year anniversary of said Doerr School of Sustainability! Nice timing.

https://sustainability.stanford.edu/news/our-first-anniversary

RE: Stanford to the ACC? - Hieronymus - 09-01-2023

(09-01-2023, 10:33 AM)ca245 Wrote: With only a 30% revenue share, will we still have to cut some sports?

Excellent question. The 30% is what , $12 million? It’s not a whole lot better than the small conference options, and about &18 million below current state. Plus millions more in travel. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I do agree though it keeps us in the top leagues which matters at least until the ACC implodes in 2036 or whenever. No idea how Cal affords it; so things could be worse.

Added; per comments below if it’s really $8 million we should have reformed up the PAC.

RE: Stanford to the ACC? - Snorlax94 - 09-01-2023

Incidentally, some fans learned this last night.

There was an alumni dinner in Waikiki and Bernard Muir was there. When I learned he was coming, I couldn’t help thinking — what is he doing here? Stanford Athletics is in a crisis, why is he traveling to Hawaii, shouldn’t he be working in Palo Alto?

Then, during his remarks, he discussed the conference issue, and he said news “could be coming as soon as tomorrow.” So that’s when i realized, here comes the ACC, and Muir traveled to hawaii because his work was done.

By the way, for all the complaints about him, he’s a very good public speaker and is exceptionally gracious in-person and you see why he’s been AD so long.

Yes I agree we shouldn’t have gotten into such a deep crisis, and I too am concerned about travel and payment distributions, but I also think Muir very much deserves the trip to paradise. He, along with many others, did get the deal done.

RE: Stanford to the ACC? - cardcrimson - 09-01-2023

(09-01-2023, 11:08 AM)Snorlax94 Wrote: Incidentally, some fans learned this last night.

There was an alumni dinner in Waikiki and Bernard Muir was there. When I learned he was coming, I couldn’t help thinking — what is he doing here? Stanford Athletics is in a crisis, why is he traveling to Hawaii, shouldn’t he be working in Palo Alto?

Then, during his remarks, he discussed the conference issue, and he said news “could be coming as soon as tomorrow.” So that’s when i realized, here comes the ACC, and Muir traveled to hawaii because his work was done.

By the way, for all the complaints about him, he’s a very good public speaker and is exceptionally gracious in-person and you see why he’s been AD so long.

Yes I agree we shouldn’t have gotten into such a deep crisis, and I too am concerned about travel and payment distributions, but I also think Muir very much deserves the trip to paradise. He, along with many others, did get the deal done.

You can not be serious.

The 13 teams, the basketball team's demise, the football team's demise, losing the Directors Cup, Varsity Blues, department bloat, horrible marketing, and on and on and on. And then there's the whole Pac-12 fiasco and us bribing the ACC to take us in.

Being a nice guy and a good speaker doesn't cut it. A trip to paradise after the hell he's wrath on Stanford. I hope it was a one way ticket.

RE: Stanford to the ACC? - magnus - 09-01-2023

(09-01-2023, 11:04 AM)Hieronymus Wrote:
(09-01-2023, 10:33 AM)ca245 Wrote: With only a 30% revenue share, will we still have to cut some sports?

Excellent question. The 30% is what , $12 million? It’s not a whole,Loy better than the small conference options, and about &18 million below current state. Plus millions more in travel. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I do agree though it keeps us in the top leagues which matters at least until the ACC implodes in 2036 or whenever. No idea how Cal affords it; so things could be worse.

I think i read 8 million somewhere.

Maybe that can be offset somewhat by the likely(?) Increase in NCAA Bball and CFP distributions?

RE: Stanford to the ACC? - Spiny_Norman - 09-01-2023

Stanford has to do a press conference for this announcement, right? I am very eager for Yang or the interim president or Rice to face direct questions. I would hope that we hear more than just a reiteration of the press release. I really want to know more about how they plan to make the finances work.

RE: Stanford to the ACC? - CowboyIndian - 09-01-2023

(09-01-2023, 11:36 AM)Spiny_Norman Wrote: Stanford has to do a press conference for this announcement, right? I am very eager for Yang or the interim president or Rice to face direct questions. I would hope that we hear more than just a reiteration of the press release. I really want to know more about how they plan to make the finances work.

I would be looking for a "Dear Mark" letter in the mail very soon.

Mudhead - Mudhead - 09-01-2023

(09-01-2023, 10:20 AM)BillBradley Wrote: I seem to be in the minority camp here...Today I have a smile on my face because Stanford just told the whole world "it's important to us to compete at the highest levels." The B10 and B12 were not interested. We were very much stuck. Any move to the MWC or the WCC or whatever Independent/combination solution people were dreaming up would have resulted in the deterioration of so many of our perennial national championship contending teams. While the travel will be onerous, if you asked the players on these teams "which would you prefer - compete in the ACC with more travel or compete against the MWC?", I'm quite certain what the answer would be. Thank goodness we got this done.

Well said. We can compare this to what wasn’t there .. a Pacific Coast Conference ..or celebrate that we got what was there..membership in a power four conference . It was a remarkable accomplishment to get this done. We had no negotiating leverage , no alternative and nothing any Power 4 conference needed. That is a very, very tough negotiating position.

RE: Stanford to the ACC? - GoodGrief - 09-01-2023

I feel like Oliver Luck dodged a bullet by not being selected as Pac-12 commissioner. In the best case, he maintains the status quo (which now seems like paradise) and gets a $500 million deal for the intact Pac-12, and we grumble that he should have negotiated for more. Worst case, he destroys the conference ala Kliavkoff/Scott. I'm glad that at least this way Luck gets credit for helping Stanford find a place in the ACC.

Btw, does this mean that WSU and OSU are just rolling in old contract TV dollars that they only have to split two ways?

RE: Stanford to the ACC? - SkiBum80 - 09-01-2023

(09-01-2023, 09:07 AM)jonnyss Wrote:
(09-01-2023, 08:47 AM)SkiBum80 Wrote:
(09-01-2023, 08:28 AM)jonnyss Wrote: unc women's soccer coach anson dorrance said the travel to the west coast would be hard on players and staff.

I offer my heartfelt and grieving remorse for the onerous imposition upon coach dorrance.
I also offer him my right butt cheek in case he is in the mood for responding with a bisou.

not what i meant. if cross-country travel for 2 games a year is onerous, how about for 20 games?

Sorry, got it. I dunno, time to be creative.
Schedule away games as much possible when school breaks during season.
Schedule groups of away games so a 1 week trip gets in several at once.
Schedule some at neutral site, like Dallas as one X post suggested.
Schedule less conference and more out of conference local games just for the "non-east" ACC members (us 3 new ones) than the core ACC folks (yes might seem unfair, but come up with an algorithm to smooth out ACC standings taking this into account)
Again, I dunno all answers, but the main success was get into a Power conference.
Then try figure out logistics as best possible.
No way to have all this figured out in advance, for any conference we might have joined, or not joined (go independent).

(09-01-2023, 09:44 AM)StanfordMatt Wrote: Mark this day as when we officially sold our athletic soul to the (blue) devil.

I see it more as our PAC-12 soul was invaded by a trojan horse and burned to the ground and left as dead in a heap of ashes.
And has arisen today like a phoenix to soar like an eagle once again (or at least as a cardinal).

RE: Stanford to the ACC? - Spiny_Norman - 09-01-2023

(09-01-2023, 11:53 AM)CowboyIndian Wrote:
(09-01-2023, 11:36 AM)Spiny_Norman Wrote: Stanford has to do a press conference for this announcement, right? I am very eager for Yang or the interim president or Rice to face direct questions. I would hope that we hear more than just a reiteration of the press release. I really want to know more about how they plan to make the finances work.

I would be looking for a "Dear Mark" letter in the mail very soon.

If it's a Dear Mark letter inviting to a Zoom event with Bernard, I will probably skip it. We will just hear a reiteration of the press release. In 12 years of his tenure, I have never once heard a comment from him that gave me any insight. It's all pablum.

RE: Mudhead - StanfordMatt - 09-01-2023

(09-01-2023, 12:08 PM)Mudhead Wrote:
(09-01-2023, 10:20 AM)BillBradley Wrote: I seem to be in the minority camp here...Today I have a smile on my face because Stanford just told the whole world "it's important to us to compete at the highest levels." The B10 and B12 were not interested. We were very much stuck. Any move to the MWC or the WCC or whatever Independent/combination solution people were dreaming up would have resulted in the deterioration of so many of our perennial national championship contending teams. While the travel will be onerous, if you asked the players on these teams "which would you prefer - compete in the ACC with more travel or compete against the MWC?", I'm quite certain what the answer would be. Thank goodness we got this done.

Well said. We can compare this to what wasn’t there .. a Pacific Coast Conference ..or celebrate that we got what was there..membership in a power four conference . It was a remarkable accomplishment to get this done. We had no negotiating leverage , no alternative and nothing any Power 4 conference needed. That is a very, very tough negotiating position.

That certainly is one way of looking at it. Respectfully, I disagree.

We’re essentially pimping our football program out, sending them cross country multiple times per season in exchange for revenue designed to keep the other programs afloat. Except wait a minute, we’re only getting pennies on the dollar in this deal so those programs’ futures are still tenuous at best.

The 12 ACC programs that ended up voting in favor of expansion did so to fatten their own pockets. None of those 12 have the ability to generate sizable revenue on their own (unlike UNC, Clemson and FSU), so they gladly agreed to take another check from ESPN for adding 3 programs while not sharing the proceeds with the newcomers. Not sure how much arm twisting that took from Stanford and Cal.

RE: Stanford to the ACC? - Hieronymus - 09-01-2023

2 random thoughts on how absurd this all is
1. So,Eros we end up with a payout below Colorado. Amazing. They are terrible at football and had one brief window in the mid 80s to 90s and are good at nothing else really with any consistency. Same for ASU.
2. Apparently the PAC 12 had negative value which is impossible. Stanford vs UCLA is worth more than Stanford vs Florida st. But consider:

- 4 big10 schools, with 2 escalating from 50% - avg minimum $210 million per yr
- Stanford and Cal getting paid less to bribe our way with a long full payoff window but say $50 million minimum for value
- 4 big12 schools at nearly $170 million
- say worst case for OSU/wsu and they get $12 million
- total is over $440 million

The conference was right to reject the ESPN $360 million. USC never would have stayed anyway, but the conference schools were worth more. Apparently just not as a conference. And anyone who says capitalism is always rational or efficient, here is a good counter.

Finally, it shows how badly our administration played its hand here.

RE: Mudhead - Spiny_Norman - 09-01-2023

(09-01-2023, 12:33 PM)StanfordMatt Wrote: We’re essentially pimping our football program out, sending them cross country multiple times per season in exchange for revenue designed to keep the other programs afloat. Except wait a minute, we’re only getting pennies on the dollar in this deal so those programs’ futures are still tenuous at best.

Even a 30% ACC share will be more than they could get from any other available option. Yes, there will be a sizeable hole in the AD budget. I expect that the powers that be have an idea on how to close it through some combination of more money from somewhere (even more aggressive fundraising? draw on the AD endowment?) and cost cutting (which may include cutting sports). So yes, I agree with you that some sports will probably be sacrificed on the altar of ACC football TV money. But in other options, they might have had to cut even more sports.

RE: Mudhead - SkiBum80 - 09-01-2023

(09-01-2023, 12:46 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:
(09-01-2023, 12:33 PM)StanfordMatt Wrote: We’re essentially pimping our football program out, sending them cross country multiple times per season in exchange for revenue designed to keep the other programs afloat. Except wait a minute, we’re only getting pennies on the dollar in this deal so those programs’ futures are still tenuous at best.

Even a 30% ACC share will be more than they could get from any other available option. Yes, there will be a sizeable hole in the AD budget. I expect that the powers that be have an idea on how to close it through some combination of more money from somewhere (even more aggressive fundraising? draw on the AD endowment?) and cost cutting (which may include cutting sports). So yes, I agree with you that some sports will probably be sacrificed on the altar of ACC football TV money. But in other options, they might have had to cut even more sports.

Yes, exactly.
It is disingenuous to compare the problems and drawbacks of joining the ACC to how life was in the PAC-12.
There is no more PAC-12, as USC/UCLA initiated the first severe blow, and then the others made sure to kick the mortally wounded victim on the way out.
Furthermore, there was apparently no option for us in B1G, and only rumors of options to the Big12.
So if making any comparison for 2024, only makes sense to compare joining ACC to joining MWC or AAC (if either would have been possible) or us trying to cobble together a residual set of misfits into some new token PAC conference, or trying to go Independent.
All these options have way worse problems then joining ACC.
As to the football team, I dunno, go ask them.
My bet is they are thrilled to have been pimped out to ACC.
Ecstatic even.
Again, compared not to what life had been in the PAC, but compared to what were any real alternatives from 2024 on.