[Mick]

I still think Stanford and Cal should have stayed in the Pac-12. The central argument is that Stanford and Cal had the opportunity to help lead a Western conference rather than become geographically isolated members of an Eastern one.

Looking back at the 2023 decision, and considering the rebuilt Pac-12's eight football programs—Oregon State, Washington State, Boise State, Colorado State, Fresno State, San Diego State, Utah State, and Texas State—here is the case for staying in the Pac-12 Conference:

1. Geographic proximity: A predominantly Western conference would have dramatically reduced travel distances for student-athletes.
2. Academic performance: Less time traveling across the country would have meant fewer missed classes and less disruption to academic schedules.
3. Student-athlete welfare: Shorter trips, fewer time-zone changes, and more predictable schedules would have improved athletes' physical and mental well-being.
4. Travel expenses: Remaining in the Pac-12 would have avoided much of the substantial increase in travel costs associated with ACC membership.
5. Environmental responsibility: Regional competition would have reduced air travel and the athletic departments' carbon footprints.
6. Financial efficiency: Remaining in the Pac-12 would have avoided the severe initial discounts Stanford and Cal accepted on ACC television distributions.
7. Institutional leadership: Stanford and Cal could have become the two most influential academic institutions in the reconstructed conference.
8. Conference governance: With only ten football-playing members, Stanford and Cal would have exercised substantially greater influence over conference policy.
9. Preservation of tradition: Remaining would have helped preserve more than a century of Pacific Coast athletic identity.
10. Regional rivalries: Regular competition with Oregon State, Washington State, and other Western universities would have strengthened existing athletic relationships.
11. Fan engagement: Regional opponents would have made attending away games more practical and affordable for students, alumni, and supporters.
12. Recruiting advantages: Playing predominantly in Western markets would have reinforced Stanford's and Cal's recruiting relationships with California and other Western states.
13. Competitive balance: Stanford and Cal would have faced a more manageable football competitive environment than the ACC.
14. Conference championships: Both schools would have enjoyed potentially better opportunities to compete for conference football titles.
15. College Football Playoff opportunities: A more attainable conference championship could have provided a credible route into the expanded College Football Playoff.
16. National television exposure: The reconstructed Pac-12 has secured national television coverage through CBS, USA Sports, and The CW, demonstrating that leaving was not the only path to media visibility.
17. Brand leadership: Stanford and Cal could have served as the academic and institutional anchors of a revitalized Western athletic conference.
18. Athletic department stability: A regional conference would have reduced logistical pressures on non-revenue and Olympic sports.
19. Family participation: Parents and families would have found it easier to attend competitions throughout the season.
20. Scheduling flexibility: A smaller Western conference could have offered more flexibility in scheduling nonconference contests against nationally prominent opponents.
21. Athletic department economics: Lower travel and operating costs could have freed resources for coaching, facilities, scholarships, and athlete development.
22. Institutional loyalty: Staying would have demonstrated loyalty to Oregon State and Washington State rather than contributing to the abandonment of two longtime conference partners.
23. Long-term conference stability: Stanford and Cal could have helped establish a financially sustainable Western conference rather than depending on the ACC's continued cohesion.
24. California market strength: The combined presence of Stanford, Cal, Fresno State, and San Diego State would have given the reconstructed Pac-12 a formidable footprint in America's most populous state.
25. Mission alignment: A Western conference would have been more consistent with Stanford's and Cal's stated commitment to balancing academic excellence, athletics, and student-athlete welfare.

One particularly telling piece of hindsight: Cal's athletic travel expenses rose approximately 40% in its first ACC season, while its media-rights revenue fell from $25 million to $11 million—although that does not establish what a rebuilt Pac-12 would have paid.

[Mick]

I still think Stanford and Cal should have stayed in the Pac-12. The central argument is that Stanford and Cal had the opportunity to help lead a Western conference rather than become geographically isolated members of an Eastern one.

Looking back at the 2023 decision, and considering the rebuilt Pac-12's eight football programs—Oregon State, Washington State, Boise State, Colorado State, Fresno State, San Diego State, Utah State, and Texas State—here is the case for staying in the Pac-12 Conference:

1. Geographic proximity: A predominantly Western conference would have dramatically reduced travel distances for student-athletes.
2. Academic performance: Less time traveling across the country would have meant fewer missed classes and less disruption to academic schedules.
3. Student-athlete welfare: Shorter trips, fewer time-zone changes, and more predictable schedules would have improved athletes' physical and mental well-being.
4. Travel expenses: Remaining in the Pac-12 would have avoided much of the substantial increase in travel costs associated with ACC membership.
5. Environmental responsibility: Regional competition would have reduced air travel and the athletic departments' carbon footprints.
6. Financial efficiency: Remaining in the Pac-12 would have avoided the severe initial discounts Stanford and Cal accepted on ACC television distributions.
7. Institutional leadership: Stanford and Cal could have become the two most influential academic institutions in the reconstructed conference.
8. Conference governance: With only ten football-playing members, Stanford and Cal would have exercised substantially greater influence over conference policy.
9. Preservation of tradition: Remaining would have helped preserve more than a century of Pacific Coast athletic identity.
10. Regional rivalries: Regular competition with Oregon State, Washington State, and other Western universities would have strengthened existing athletic relationships.
11. Fan engagement: Regional opponents would have made attending away games more practical and affordable for students, alumni, and supporters.
12. Recruiting advantages: Playing predominantly in Western markets would have reinforced Stanford's and Cal's recruiting relationships with California and other Western states.
13. Competitive balance: Stanford and Cal would have faced a more manageable football competitive environment than the ACC.
14. Conference championships: Both schools would have enjoyed potentially better opportunities to compete for conference football titles.
15. College Football Playoff opportunities: A more attainable conference championship could have provided a credible route into the expanded College Football Playoff.
16. National television exposure: The reconstructed Pac-12 has secured national television coverage through CBS, USA Sports, and The CW, demonstrating that leaving was not the only path to media visibility.
17. Brand leadership: Stanford and Cal could have served as the academic and institutional anchors of a revitalized Western athletic conference.
18. Athletic department stability: A regional conference would have reduced logistical pressures on non-revenue and Olympic sports.
19. Family participation: Parents and families would have found it easier to attend competitions throughout the season.
20. Scheduling flexibility: A smaller Western conference could have offered more flexibility in scheduling nonconference contests against nationally prominent opponents.
21. Athletic department economics: Lower travel and operating costs could have freed resources for coaching, facilities, scholarships, and athlete development.
22. Institutional loyalty: Staying would have demonstrated loyalty to Oregon State and Washington State rather than contributing to the abandonment of two longtime conference partners.
23. Long-term conference stability: Stanford and Cal could have helped establish a financially sustainable Western conference rather than depending on the ACC's continued cohesion.
24. California market strength: The combined presence of Stanford, Cal, Fresno State, and San Diego State would have given the reconstructed Pac-12 a formidable footprint in America's most populous state.
25. Mission alignment: A Western conference would have been more consistent with Stanford's and Cal's stated commitment to balancing academic excellence, athletics, and student-athlete welfare.

One particularly telling piece of hindsight: Cal's athletic travel expenses rose approximately 40% in its first ACC season, while its media-rights revenue fell from $25 million to $11 million—although that does not establish what a rebuilt Pac-12 would have paid.