[grendalor]

We may get an invite to the ACC, and that might convince us that we are still relevant, but I think that only keeps things going until the next round of conference realignment.  I think the eventual outcome is going to be a 20-40 team super-conference along the lines of what is suggested in this Athletic article: https://theathletic.com/4776402/2023/08/...er-league/ and whether this round or the next or the one after that, at some point the consolidation will leave Stanford without a seat.  I'm at peace with that.  Things change; the Ivy League was the center of the football universe a century ago; Chicago dropped football in the 30's and left the Big Ten in the 40's.  I think it is probably time to think about life after big time athletics for Stanford as well.

BC

It's the ultimate question, and I kind of agree that what we are seeing now is not the final iteration of "realignment", but that we are heading towards a super-league, probably with regional divisions, which will facilitate a playoff from that super-league.  And that it's very unlikely Stanford would make the cut for that kind of league.  However, given that this is not where we are right now, and that the future is ultimately uncertain, and that there is always going to be a bias for not deciding to head off into the sunset a la UofC, it seems likely to me that we will focus on some way to kick the can for the time being as the most "prudent" thing to do under the circumstances.  Which would also happen to match the institution's general modus operandi.

I generally agree, by the way, with the argument from demographics and culture.  It doesn't have that much to do with Stanford students/alumni having other interests than sports -- that's also the case for most alums from Michigan, Notre Dame, Wisconsin, etc.  The difference is (1) a much larger number (so the fanatical percentage is a much larger absolute number of people) and (2) the institutional culture, which tends to sweep up into it people who have modest interest in a more fulsome way.  That is, modestly interested Michigan fans will still show up to games, because it's what you do in the Fall, especially against certain opponents (even before the recent renaissance of success), and most of those people are not die hard sports fanatics, they are just average alums and locals who are swept up into the culture created and sustained by the core who are fanatics, which is a small percentage of a much bigger number, and therefore more able to create that attractive culture that others get swept up into.  

We have none of that, across the board -- our numbers are small (and will always remain so), and our overall culture is the opposite, and tends toward maintaining a blase detachment, ironic or otherwise.  This was good enough when we were kind of an academic jewel in the Pac's crown, and our schtick worked -- we could be substantively successful on the field regardless of our demographic and cultural challenges, because we have belonged to this conference since time immemorial at this point and we were a part of the furniture (and a valued one, for other reasons).  When you shift the lens from that one to a more bottom line, national, TV-driven lens, that approach doesn't work very well, and we are seeing the results of that now.  We ought to have managed our way better than we have done, there is no doubt of that, and we likely would have been significantly less worse off than we are now had we done so, but there are limits nonetheless, and they are limits we will always face.

Vanderbilt and NU are living the Stanford life right now, ensconced in their respective citadel conferences.  And good for them ... for now.  If things move to a super-league, though ... well, we will not be the only ones sitting in the boat we are currently in, methinks.

[grendalor]

We may get an invite to the ACC, and that might convince us that we are still relevant, but I think that only keeps things going until the next round of conference realignment.  I think the eventual outcome is going to be a 20-40 team super-conference along the lines of what is suggested in this Athletic article: https://theathletic.com/4776402/2023/08/...er-league/ and whether this round or the next or the one after that, at some point the consolidation will leave Stanford without a seat.  I'm at peace with that.  Things change; the Ivy League was the center of the football universe a century ago; Chicago dropped football in the 30's and left the Big Ten in the 40's.  I think it is probably time to think about life after big time athletics for Stanford as well.

BC

It's the ultimate question, and I kind of agree that what we are seeing now is not the final iteration of "realignment", but that we are heading towards a super-league, probably with regional divisions, which will facilitate a playoff from that super-league.  And that it's very unlikely Stanford would make the cut for that kind of league.  However, given that this is not where we are right now, and that the future is ultimately uncertain, and that there is always going to be a bias for not deciding to head off into the sunset a la UofC, it seems likely to me that we will focus on some way to kick the can for the time being as the most "prudent" thing to do under the circumstances.  Which would also happen to match the institution's general modus operandi.

I generally agree, by the way, with the argument from demographics and culture.  It doesn't have that much to do with Stanford students/alumni having other interests than sports -- that's also the case for most alums from Michigan, Notre Dame, Wisconsin, etc.  The difference is (1) a much larger number (so the fanatical percentage is a much larger absolute number of people) and (2) the institutional culture, which tends to sweep up into it people who have modest interest in a more fulsome way.  That is, modestly interested Michigan fans will still show up to games, because it's what you do in the Fall, especially against certain opponents (even before the recent renaissance of success), and most of those people are not die hard sports fanatics, they are just average alums and locals who are swept up into the culture created and sustained by the core who are fanatics, which is a small percentage of a much bigger number, and therefore more able to create that attractive culture that others get swept up into.  

We have none of that, across the board -- our numbers are small (and will always remain so), and our overall culture is the opposite, and tends toward maintaining a blase detachment, ironic or otherwise.  This was good enough when we were kind of an academic jewel in the Pac's crown, and our schtick worked -- we could be substantively successful on the field regardless of our demographic and cultural challenges, because we have belonged to this conference since time immemorial at this point and we were a part of the furniture (and a valued one, for other reasons).  When you shift the lens from that one to a more bottom line, national, TV-driven lens, that approach doesn't work very well, and we are seeing the results of that now.  We ought to have managed our way better than we have done, there is no doubt of that, and we likely would have been significantly less worse off than we are now had we done so, but there are limits nonetheless, and they are limits we will always face.

Vanderbilt and NU are living the Stanford life right now, ensconced in their respective citadel conferences.  And good for them ... for now.  If things move to a super-league, though ... well, we will not be the only ones sitting in the boat we are currently in, methinks.