[calfan]

Hi everyone! This is my second post & first thread that I'm starting so I apologize if I should post elsewhere or if I've managed to somehow bungle this. Anyways, I am a current student at Cal, and I was wondering how much it would matter to you all that Cal + Stanford sticks together in conference realignment. I've always been curious about the perception of Cal from a Stanford point of view. Given the recent developments of Colorado & subsequent rumors of the 4 corners (& Oregon/Washington) fleeing, I was just curious how much staying with Cal matters, and the general perception you hold about us.

Hope you all have had a lovely, relaxing weekend!

[calfan]

Hi everyone! This is my second post & first thread that I'm starting so I apologize if I should post elsewhere or if I've managed to somehow bungle this. Anyways, I am a current student at Cal, and I was wondering how much it would matter to you all that Cal + Stanford sticks together in conference realignment. I've always been curious about the perception of Cal from a Stanford point of view. Given the recent developments of Colorado & subsequent rumors of the 4 corners (& Oregon/Washington) fleeing, I was just curious how much staying with Cal matters, and the general perception you hold about us.

Hope you all have had a lovely, relaxing weekend!

[Softball Fan]

Great question.  Great post.  I always viewed Cal as an excellent institution academically and in many other ways.   However I don't see any need for loyalty between the two institutions in this situation.  That goes in both directions.  If the PAC falls apart it's every man for himself; whatever deal each school can work out in its own best interest.

It's in Stanford's interest to keep Cal as a travel partner and longtime rival in all sports.  From that standpoint it would be better to have Cal in the same conference.  However any realignment will mostly come down to money.

[Softball Fan]

Great question.  Great post.  I always viewed Cal as an excellent institution academically and in many other ways.   However I don't see any need for loyalty between the two institutions in this situation.  That goes in both directions.  If the PAC falls apart it's every man for himself; whatever deal each school can work out in its own best interest.

It's in Stanford's interest to keep Cal as a travel partner and longtime rival in all sports.  From that standpoint it would be better to have Cal in the same conference.  However any realignment will mostly come down to money.

[Canalejas]

I'm going to be at the extreme end of the spectrum of answers we give to this question.  

Sticking with Cal is my most desired outcome and most important consideration.  I can't begin to express how much respect I lost for UCLA when they ditched Berkeley.  I don't want to be like the Bruins and throw away history for the sake of money.  

I really hope we can both stay in the top level of collegiate sports, which probably only happens if the Big Ten changes their mind about inviting us.  But even if we don't get that call, I'd rather stay shackled to the weenies in a replenished Pac, a diminished Pac, or even in the Big West should we have to test football independence or stop playing football altogether.  My main source of sports joy is beating Cal.  I hope it always will be.

[Canalejas]

I'm going to be at the extreme end of the spectrum of answers we give to this question.  

Sticking with Cal is my most desired outcome and most important consideration.  I can't begin to express how much respect I lost for UCLA when they ditched Berkeley.  I don't want to be like the Bruins and throw away history for the sake of money.  

I really hope we can both stay in the top level of collegiate sports, which probably only happens if the Big Ten changes their mind about inviting us.  But even if we don't get that call, I'd rather stay shackled to the weenies in a replenished Pac, a diminished Pac, or even in the Big West should we have to test football independence or stop playing football altogether.  My main source of sports joy is beating Cal.  I hope it always will be.

[needle]

Well said, Canalejas!

(I find myself increasingly fatalistic about all this conference stuff. It truly is remarkable how the general wishes of alums/fans seem to matter hardly at all when it comes to decisions about conference membership. I suspect playing Cal/having a traditional rival is a fun experience for Stanford athletes, so I hope that is given some consideration at least.)

[needle]

Well said, Canalejas!

(I find myself increasingly fatalistic about all this conference stuff. It truly is remarkable how the general wishes of alums/fans seem to matter hardly at all when it comes to decisions about conference membership. I suspect playing Cal/having a traditional rival is a fun experience for Stanford athletes, so I hope that is given some consideration at least.)

[pefloresjr]

I prefer Cal and Stanford remain a pair in the same conference.  The rivalry is one of the only consistent forces energizing sports on both campuses.  However, given the changing landscape, I'm not sure it's going to matter.  I have some ambivalent feelings about whether I even want Stanford to continue in the pay to play world.   If the Pac is disappearing, my preference would be for much of the Pac to form the Western division of the Big10 and we would have a de facto Pac with the lesser part of most sports' seasons made up of rotating teams from the rest of the Big10.  But that is all based on the assumption that it is possible to remain in major college sports.  Both Cal and Stanford have large segments of their campuses and alumni who are ambivalent or hostile to the role sports play at such high level institutions.  I'm not sure we can really stay in the game without broad based support from each campus.

I thought it was interesting that there seemed to be some in the Big10 who wanted Stanford and ND as a new pair but that change would be subject to the issues raised above.  I'm sure that the Stanford fan base will never be as all in on the importance of sports/football the way that ND is.  Bottom line for me is I would be ok with separating from Cal if Stanford had a good place to go and if there are limits on the professionalization of college sports.  My hopes are not high and I expect that Stanford and Cal will probably end up in a similar place as everything shakes out over the next few years.  

Cheers,
Pete F.

[pefloresjr]

I prefer Cal and Stanford remain a pair in the same conference.  The rivalry is one of the only consistent forces energizing sports on both campuses.  However, given the changing landscape, I'm not sure it's going to matter.  I have some ambivalent feelings about whether I even want Stanford to continue in the pay to play world.   If the Pac is disappearing, my preference would be for much of the Pac to form the Western division of the Big10 and we would have a de facto Pac with the lesser part of most sports' seasons made up of rotating teams from the rest of the Big10.  But that is all based on the assumption that it is possible to remain in major college sports.  Both Cal and Stanford have large segments of their campuses and alumni who are ambivalent or hostile to the role sports play at such high level institutions.  I'm not sure we can really stay in the game without broad based support from each campus.

I thought it was interesting that there seemed to be some in the Big10 who wanted Stanford and ND as a new pair but that change would be subject to the issues raised above.  I'm sure that the Stanford fan base will never be as all in on the importance of sports/football the way that ND is.  Bottom line for me is I would be ok with separating from Cal if Stanford had a good place to go and if there are limits on the professionalization of college sports.  My hopes are not high and I expect that Stanford and Cal will probably end up in a similar place as everything shakes out over the next few years.  

Cheers,
Pete F.

[norcard10]

could care less.  The rivalry with USC and Oregon on the diamond, gridiron, court has been more meaningful

Cal is a good school. But athletic conferences are about just that.

[norcard10]

could care less.  The rivalry with USC and Oregon on the diamond, gridiron, court has been more meaningful

Cal is a good school. But athletic conferences are about just that.

[marchballer]

I don’t care if we split apart. Even if we weren’t in the same conference, most sports will still play each other due to geographical proximity. 

Cal fans would leave Stanford in the dust if given the opportunity.

[marchballer]

I don’t care if we split apart. Even if we weren’t in the same conference, most sports will still play each other due to geographical proximity. 

Cal fans would leave Stanford in the dust if given the opportunity.

[Mick]

I didn't attend either school, but I have had family at both...one granddad at Stanford, one at Cal. I've been attending Cal v. Stanford games since the 1970s. My roommate in between college and marriage was a Cal grad and still a good friend.

They're both great institutions, approaching the education business in similar yet separate ways. I have two sons in essentially the same boat. Very similar, but with categorical differences. And I would have been delighted and proud if they had attended either school.

I have been a Stanford athletics fan for half-a-century, and I always will be, despite conference moves or temporary administrative errors in judgment. I'm a Cal fan to the extent that I want to see strong Cal teams play strong Stanford teams...that's always the best.

I would far prefer Cal and Stanford to remain in the same conference. They are essentially perfect rivals. Similar enough that you get up for the game/match, and different enough to make it count. And I expect that Cal and Stanford...like USC and UCLA...will make every effort to remain together. Hopefully it happens.

Incidentally, I'm still a fan of UCLA. Both my sons are in long-term relationships with two wonderful women who are UCLA alums.

Not as big a fan of USC for a variety of reasons, starting with the constant, SEC-like cheating. I stipulate that it has strong academics, particularly in certain disciplines. My sister's three children all attended USC and my cousin attended USC for a semester before transferring to Reed. So in an effort to be fair and balanced, I encouraged both my sons to consider USC as an educational option. Older one said "I'd rather go to a junior college." Younger one agreed -- reluctantly -- to tour the USC campus with me. We were on the campus for all of 11 minutes before he turned on his heel and said "I'm not going here."

Losing a close rival means you lose something important. If they end up in different conferences, I hope they maintain the all-sport rivalry, which dates back to the 19th century.

[Mick]

I didn't attend either school, but I have had family at both...one granddad at Stanford, one at Cal. I've been attending Cal v. Stanford games since the 1970s. My roommate in between college and marriage was a Cal grad and still a good friend.

They're both great institutions, approaching the education business in similar yet separate ways. I have two sons in essentially the same boat. Very similar, but with categorical differences. And I would have been delighted and proud if they had attended either school.

I have been a Stanford athletics fan for half-a-century, and I always will be, despite conference moves or temporary administrative errors in judgment. I'm a Cal fan to the extent that I want to see strong Cal teams play strong Stanford teams...that's always the best.

I would far prefer Cal and Stanford to remain in the same conference. They are essentially perfect rivals. Similar enough that you get up for the game/match, and different enough to make it count. And I expect that Cal and Stanford...like USC and UCLA...will make every effort to remain together. Hopefully it happens.

Incidentally, I'm still a fan of UCLA. Both my sons are in long-term relationships with two wonderful women who are UCLA alums.

Not as big a fan of USC for a variety of reasons, starting with the constant, SEC-like cheating. I stipulate that it has strong academics, particularly in certain disciplines. My sister's three children all attended USC and my cousin attended USC for a semester before transferring to Reed. So in an effort to be fair and balanced, I encouraged both my sons to consider USC as an educational option. Older one said "I'd rather go to a junior college." Younger one agreed -- reluctantly -- to tour the USC campus with me. We were on the campus for all of 11 minutes before he turned on his heel and said "I'm not going here."

Losing a close rival means you lose something important. If they end up in different conferences, I hope they maintain the all-sport rivalry, which dates back to the 19th century.

[cardcrimson]

I didn't attend either school, but I have had family at both...one granddad at Stanford, one at Cal. I've been attending Cal v. Stanford games since the 1970s. My roommate in between college and marriage was a Cal grad and still a good friend.

They're both great institutions, approaching the education business in similar yet separate ways. I have two sons in essentially the same boat. Very similar, but with categorical differences. And I would have been delighted and proud if they had attended either school.

I have been a Stanford athletics fan for half-a-century, and I always will be, despite conference moves or temporary administrative errors in judgment. I'm a Cal fan to the extent that I want to see strong Cal teams play strong Stanford teams...that's always the best.

I would far prefer Cal and Stanford to remain in the same conference. They are essentially perfect rivals. Similar enough that you get up for the game/match, and different enough to make it count. And I expect that Cal and Stanford...like USC and UCLA...will make every effort to remain together. Hopefully it happens.

Incidentally, I'm still a fan of UCLA. Both my sons are in long-term relationships with two wonderful women who are UCLA alums.

Not as big a fan of USC for a variety of reasons, starting with the constant, SEC-like cheating. I stipulate that it has strong academics, particularly in certain disciplines. My sister's three children all attended USC and my cousin attended USC for a semester before transferring to Reed. So in an effort to be fair and balanced, I encouraged both my sons to consider USC as an educational option. Older one said "I'd rather go to a junior college." Younger one agreed -- reluctantly -- to tour the USC campus with me. We were on the campus for all of 11 minutes before he turned on his heel and said "I'm not going here."

Losing a close rival means you lose something important. If they end up in different conferences, I hope they maintain the all-sport rivalry, which dates back to the 19th century.

In general, it means a lot. In practicality not as much as it once did. I've given up going to Berkeley for games years ago. My wife was new to California (the state) and we went to Big Game in the mid 2000s. It was also Iron Bowl day and she was wearing Crimson. The amount of profanities hurled at the both of us, and the food hurled our way, as well, was unbelievable. And we were just walking down the street wearing two different shades of red. What was once a good natured rivalry has lost something. . . ..

[cardcrimson]

I didn't attend either school, but I have had family at both...one granddad at Stanford, one at Cal. I've been attending Cal v. Stanford games since the 1970s. My roommate in between college and marriage was a Cal grad and still a good friend.

They're both great institutions, approaching the education business in similar yet separate ways. I have two sons in essentially the same boat. Very similar, but with categorical differences. And I would have been delighted and proud if they had attended either school.

I have been a Stanford athletics fan for half-a-century, and I always will be, despite conference moves or temporary administrative errors in judgment. I'm a Cal fan to the extent that I want to see strong Cal teams play strong Stanford teams...that's always the best.

I would far prefer Cal and Stanford to remain in the same conference. They are essentially perfect rivals. Similar enough that you get up for the game/match, and different enough to make it count. And I expect that Cal and Stanford...like USC and UCLA...will make every effort to remain together. Hopefully it happens.

Incidentally, I'm still a fan of UCLA. Both my sons are in long-term relationships with two wonderful women who are UCLA alums.

Not as big a fan of USC for a variety of reasons, starting with the constant, SEC-like cheating. I stipulate that it has strong academics, particularly in certain disciplines. My sister's three children all attended USC and my cousin attended USC for a semester before transferring to Reed. So in an effort to be fair and balanced, I encouraged both my sons to consider USC as an educational option. Older one said "I'd rather go to a junior college." Younger one agreed -- reluctantly -- to tour the USC campus with me. We were on the campus for all of 11 minutes before he turned on his heel and said "I'm not going here."

Losing a close rival means you lose something important. If they end up in different conferences, I hope they maintain the all-sport rivalry, which dates back to the 19th century.

In general, it means a lot. In practicality not as much as it once did. I've given up going to Berkeley for games years ago. My wife was new to California (the state) and we went to Big Game in the mid 2000s. It was also Iron Bowl day and she was wearing Crimson. The amount of profanities hurled at the both of us, and the food hurled our way, as well, was unbelievable. And we were just walking down the street wearing two different shades of red. What was once a good natured rivalry has lost something. . . ..

[Mudhead]

Cal is no more important to Stanford than many other West Coast schools .  If we just talk about football, Norte Dame is more important than Cal.  

USC, Oregon, UCLA and probably Washington are more significant athletic rivals to Stanford simply because beating them maters to people outside of a very tight geography in the Bay Area . The “Big ——- “ thing has felt manufactured over the last twenty years .

All things equal, it would be nice to be in the same conference with any of these schools but “nice” is not essential .  Neither Cal nor Stanford nor any other school can afford to stay linked if that is a great economic cost.

If we do in fact get the opportunity to be part of the Big whatever, we should jump at it.

 The alternative is Division 3 or Ivy League and that would be a brobdingnagian cultural change , ie a retreat by Stanford from excellence at the highest level .  It may come to that and we might be forced to go there out of dislike for the consequences of NIL, an open transfer portal and fear of “ big media” and the money it provides. But Stanford would be a different place  then and not a better one. It would be a lesser of evils kind of move.

I hope that for now , Stanford  is actively pursuing membership in the only major conference that appears to be open, the former Big 10.

[Mudhead]

Cal is no more important to Stanford than many other West Coast schools .  If we just talk about football, Norte Dame is more important than Cal.  

USC, Oregon, UCLA and probably Washington are more significant athletic rivals to Stanford simply because beating them maters to people outside of a very tight geography in the Bay Area . The “Big ——- “ thing has felt manufactured over the last twenty years .

All things equal, it would be nice to be in the same conference with any of these schools but “nice” is not essential .  Neither Cal nor Stanford nor any other school can afford to stay linked if that is a great economic cost.

If we do in fact get the opportunity to be part of the Big whatever, we should jump at it.

 The alternative is Division 3 or Ivy League and that would be a brobdingnagian cultural change , ie a retreat by Stanford from excellence at the highest level .  It may come to that and we might be forced to go there out of dislike for the consequences of NIL, an open transfer portal and fear of “ big media” and the money it provides. But Stanford would be a different place  then and not a better one. It would be a lesser of evils kind of move.

I hope that for now , Stanford  is actively pursuing membership in the only major conference that appears to be open, the former Big 10.

[81alum]

One part of my enjoyment of college football is the game itself, but another part of it is the sense of history and tradition behind it.  The specter of competing against an age-old rival and the enthusiasm of the students and fans for beating the other school adds a lot to the college game that pro sports lack for me.  I used to know some of our football players when I was in college, and the fact that they and I were fellow students dramatically increased my attachment to our team.  And going to the games with other students was a deep social experience that left a lifelong warm and fuzzy residual memory.

Every time the traditions associated with the game get weakened my interest has waned.  This includes a great many changes that were all made to enhance revenue.  1) Cal no longer being the last game of the regular season, 2) moving games from Saturday afternoons to night or even other days of the week, 3) making the game increasingly about carpetbagger players rather than loyalty to the school, 4) the loss of 100 year rivals like USC and UCLA to the almighty buck, 5) the knowledge that many players are primarily playing for dollars and not out of attachment to their school--even those who stay put.  

I already find my attachment to the whole "walk to the stadium on Saturday afternoon to watch the good guys battle the bad guys" experience to be diminished, vanished.  I am the kind of fan who gets "sidelined" by the whole "produce a canned TV product for mass consumption and the rest of the experience be damned" mentality that has taken over.

The loss of Cal would simply be one more in a long string of changes that has already undermined my interest in football.  It might be a fatal one, given that my interest is already at the lowest point it has been since I became a fan my freshman year (Walsh's first year) in 1977.

[81alum]

One part of my enjoyment of college football is the game itself, but another part of it is the sense of history and tradition behind it.  The specter of competing against an age-old rival and the enthusiasm of the students and fans for beating the other school adds a lot to the college game that pro sports lack for me.  I used to know some of our football players when I was in college, and the fact that they and I were fellow students dramatically increased my attachment to our team.  And going to the games with other students was a deep social experience that left a lifelong warm and fuzzy residual memory.

Every time the traditions associated with the game get weakened my interest has waned.  This includes a great many changes that were all made to enhance revenue.  1) Cal no longer being the last game of the regular season, 2) moving games from Saturday afternoons to night or even other days of the week, 3) making the game increasingly about carpetbagger players rather than loyalty to the school, 4) the loss of 100 year rivals like USC and UCLA to the almighty buck, 5) the knowledge that many players are primarily playing for dollars and not out of attachment to their school--even those who stay put.  

I already find my attachment to the whole "walk to the stadium on Saturday afternoon to watch the good guys battle the bad guys" experience to be diminished, vanished.  I am the kind of fan who gets "sidelined" by the whole "produce a canned TV product for mass consumption and the rest of the experience be damned" mentality that has taken over.

The loss of Cal would simply be one more in a long string of changes that has already undermined my interest in football.  It might be a fatal one, given that my interest is already at the lowest point it has been since I became a fan my freshman year (Walsh's first year) in 1977.

[Canalejas]

Just a side note, but when people imagine the dire consequences of not keeping up with the Joneses, I'm not sure it's useful to say that we'd be Ivy League or D3.  At least not if they mean it literally.  

There's no indication that the Ivy League will ever invite us or any new members to their club.  

And the D3 landscape in NorCal is so barren that UC Santa Cruz has to play their sports in something called the Coast-to-Coast Athletic Conference, with their closest conference-mate in Milwaukee.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coast_to_C...Conference  

So it'd be either that for us, or convincing the SCIAC bus league to add us as an outpost.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_C...Conference  

No I think our floor (and Cal's, for that matter,) has to still be in D1.

[Canalejas]

Just a side note, but when people imagine the dire consequences of not keeping up with the Joneses, I'm not sure it's useful to say that we'd be Ivy League or D3.  At least not if they mean it literally.  

There's no indication that the Ivy League will ever invite us or any new members to their club.  

And the D3 landscape in NorCal is so barren that UC Santa Cruz has to play their sports in something called the Coast-to-Coast Athletic Conference, with their closest conference-mate in Milwaukee.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coast_to_C...Conference  

So it'd be either that for us, or convincing the SCIAC bus league to add us as an outpost.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_C...Conference  

No I think our floor (and Cal's, for that matter,) has to still be in D1.

[Chupacabra]

It would be nice. But it isn't necessary, in that both schools seem to be taking a significantly less serious approach to having high-level athletics than they have at various times in their histories. Of course if Cal and Stanford both pushed football to the level they are capable of pushing it, there would still be a Pac 12 instead of Pac 9.

These are two schools with immense resources that could pour money into the modern college game. Neither does to the degree they could. Cal, especially, is the sleeping giant of college football. I'd go so far as saying that Cal is a college football giant in a coma. It's the flagship school of the UC system, in an area with some of the best weather in the world with potential access to just about anything a player or coach would desire. It has a much bigger alumni base than Stanford. It's in the Bay Area with access to San Francisco, Oakland, and just about any form of entertainment you could want. It could recruit nationally like Stanford. As the preeminent public university in the country, its academics are only matched by Stanford and a few D1 schools (and only a few schools in the country). In many ways it could be considered the most attractive college football program in the country.

If they prioritized football. At all.

But they don't so staying in the same conference doesn't matter anymore.

[Chupacabra]

It would be nice. But it isn't necessary, in that both schools seem to be taking a significantly less serious approach to having high-level athletics than they have at various times in their histories. Of course if Cal and Stanford both pushed football to the level they are capable of pushing it, there would still be a Pac 12 instead of Pac 9.

These are two schools with immense resources that could pour money into the modern college game. Neither does to the degree they could. Cal, especially, is the sleeping giant of college football. I'd go so far as saying that Cal is a college football giant in a coma. It's the flagship school of the UC system, in an area with some of the best weather in the world with potential access to just about anything a player or coach would desire. It has a much bigger alumni base than Stanford. It's in the Bay Area with access to San Francisco, Oakland, and just about any form of entertainment you could want. It could recruit nationally like Stanford. As the preeminent public university in the country, its academics are only matched by Stanford and a few D1 schools (and only a few schools in the country). In many ways it could be considered the most attractive college football program in the country.

If they prioritized football. At all.

But they don't so staying in the same conference doesn't matter anymore.

[gailtate]

Self-immolate with the weenies? No thanks. Stanford has a higher ceiling in sports despite what Mad Dog thinks. The world in which we grew up and came of age no longer exists. Live in the past, die in the past.

[gailtate]

Self-immolate with the weenies? No thanks. Stanford has a higher ceiling in sports despite what Mad Dog thinks. The world in which we grew up and came of age no longer exists. Live in the past, die in the past.

[gailtate]

It would be nice. But it isn't necessary, in that both schools seem to be taking a significantly less serious approach to having high-level athletics than they have at various times in their histories. Of course if Cal and Stanford both pushed football to the level they are capable of pushing it, there would still be a Pac 12 instead of Pac 9.

These are two schools with immense resources that could pour money into the modern college game. Neither does to the degree they could. Cal, especially, is the sleeping giant of college football. I'd go so far as saying that Cal is a college football giant in a coma. It's the flagship school of the UC system, in an area with some of the best weather in the world with potential access to just about anything a player or coach would desire. It has a much bigger alumni base than Stanford. It's in the Bay Area with access to San Francisco, Oakland, and just about any form of entertainment you could want. It could recruit nationally like Stanford. As the preeminent public university in the country, its academics are only matched by Stanford and a few D1 schools (and only a few schools in the country). In many ways it could be considered the most attractive college football program in the country.

If they prioritized football. At all.

But they don't so staying in the same conference doesn't matter anymore.

All the assets you cite are bang-on. You omit the definitive liability however. Berkeley, by choice, is so culturally "woke" that it has voluntarily fallen into that coma you aptly point out. It is now a full-fledged, political dead-end for the level of sports now called for. It's not so much a sleeping giant as it is a comatose, shriveled laboratory curiosity that was once a proud and formidable department of athletics. All the ingredients are there, as you indicated, but there is no appetite for anything that is not plant-based.

[gailtate]

It would be nice. But it isn't necessary, in that both schools seem to be taking a significantly less serious approach to having high-level athletics than they have at various times in their histories. Of course if Cal and Stanford both pushed football to the level they are capable of pushing it, there would still be a Pac 12 instead of Pac 9.

These are two schools with immense resources that could pour money into the modern college game. Neither does to the degree they could. Cal, especially, is the sleeping giant of college football. I'd go so far as saying that Cal is a college football giant in a coma. It's the flagship school of the UC system, in an area with some of the best weather in the world with potential access to just about anything a player or coach would desire. It has a much bigger alumni base than Stanford. It's in the Bay Area with access to San Francisco, Oakland, and just about any form of entertainment you could want. It could recruit nationally like Stanford. As the preeminent public university in the country, its academics are only matched by Stanford and a few D1 schools (and only a few schools in the country). In many ways it could be considered the most attractive college football program in the country.

If they prioritized football. At all.

But they don't so staying in the same conference doesn't matter anymore.

All the assets you cite are bang-on. You omit the definitive liability however. Berkeley, by choice, is so culturally "woke" that it has voluntarily fallen into that coma you aptly point out. It is now a full-fledged, political dead-end for the level of sports now called for. It's not so much a sleeping giant as it is a comatose, shriveled laboratory curiosity that was once a proud and formidable department of athletics. All the ingredients are there, as you indicated, but there is no appetite for anything that is not plant-based.

[2006alum]

I think anyone invested in the Stanford-Cal rivalry is smart enough to know an anti-"woke" screed violates the board's rules. Let's keep this off politics please.

[2006alum]

I think anyone invested in the Stanford-Cal rivalry is smart enough to know an anti-"woke" screed violates the board's rules. Let's keep this off politics please.

[chrisk]

Cal is no more important to Stanford than many other West Coast schools .  If we just talk about football, Norte Dame is more important than Cal.  

USC, Oregon, UCLA and probably Washington are more significant athletic rivals to Stanford simply because beating them maters to people outside of a very tight geography in the Bay Area . The “Big ——- “ thing has felt manufactured over the last twenty years .

All things equal, it would be nice to be in the same conference with any of these schools but “nice” is not essential .  Neither Cal nor Stanford nor any other school can afford to stay linked if that is a great economic cost.

If we do in fact get the opportunity to be part of the Big whatever, we should jump at it.

 The alternative is Division 3 or Ivy League and that would be a of immense proportions cultural change , ie a retreat by Stanford from excellence at the highest level .  It may come to that and we might be forced to go there out of dislike for the consequences of NIL, an open transfer portal and fear of “ big media” and the money it provides. But Stanford would be a different place  then and not a better one. It would be a lesser of evils kind of move.

I hope that for now , Stanford  is actively pursuing membership in the only major conference that appears to be open, the former Big 10.

Where do you get the impression that the Big 10 is open? The new commissioner has pretty well said the door is shut.

[chrisk]

Cal is no more important to Stanford than many other West Coast schools .  If we just talk about football, Norte Dame is more important than Cal.  

USC, Oregon, UCLA and probably Washington are more significant athletic rivals to Stanford simply because beating them maters to people outside of a very tight geography in the Bay Area . The “Big ——- “ thing has felt manufactured over the last twenty years .

All things equal, it would be nice to be in the same conference with any of these schools but “nice” is not essential .  Neither Cal nor Stanford nor any other school can afford to stay linked if that is a great economic cost.

If we do in fact get the opportunity to be part of the Big whatever, we should jump at it.

 The alternative is Division 3 or Ivy League and that would be a of immense proportions cultural change , ie a retreat by Stanford from excellence at the highest level .  It may come to that and we might be forced to go there out of dislike for the consequences of NIL, an open transfer portal and fear of “ big media” and the money it provides. But Stanford would be a different place  then and not a better one. It would be a lesser of evils kind of move.

I hope that for now , Stanford  is actively pursuing membership in the only major conference that appears to be open, the former Big 10.

Where do you get the impression that the Big 10 is open? The new commissioner has pretty well said the door is shut.

[fullmetal]

I suspect a lot of Cal's long-term athletic issues stem from their budget and debt obligations.  This is going to weigh on them for some time unless small developmental miracles occur at the personnel level on their teams.  While I find the rivalry cute and rewarding (despite being on the losing end of it in my particular sport), I do think that modern athletics is all about the revenue sports and TV rights.  Stanford may have to think for itself in an age where conference traditions/affiliations have been very suddenly upended.

[fullmetal]

I suspect a lot of Cal's long-term athletic issues stem from their budget and debt obligations.  This is going to weigh on them for some time unless small developmental miracles occur at the personnel level on their teams.  While I find the rivalry cute and rewarding (despite being on the losing end of it in my particular sport), I do think that modern athletics is all about the revenue sports and TV rights.  Stanford may have to think for itself in an age where conference traditions/affiliations have been very suddenly upended.

[Canalejas]

OP, have you guys discussed this question over on any Bears forums? If so, can you provide a link?  I'm curious.

[Canalejas]

OP, have you guys discussed this question over on any Bears forums? If so, can you provide a link?  I'm curious.

[82lsju]

in my current disillusioned state I'd say staying in the came conference with Cal is a pretty low priority.

As many have pointed out we could still play them in non-conference games which would be sufficient to maintain the rivalry, which may become less of a thing depending on how things play out.

Based on my circle of friends I'm also not all that sure that the rivalry is as "heated" as it was years ago (and yes we're in our early 60s and may not be representative of Stanford fans, but some of us still buy season tickets to some sports).  My friend's kids at either Stanford or Cal don't seem to be all that concerned with the "rivalry"...

[82lsju]

in my current disillusioned state I'd say staying in the came conference with Cal is a pretty low priority.

As many have pointed out we could still play them in non-conference games which would be sufficient to maintain the rivalry, which may become less of a thing depending on how things play out.

Based on my circle of friends I'm also not all that sure that the rivalry is as "heated" as it was years ago (and yes we're in our early 60s and may not be representative of Stanford fans, but some of us still buy season tickets to some sports).  My friend's kids at either Stanford or Cal don't seem to be all that concerned with the "rivalry"...