[CardInDSM]

Longtime lurker, first-time poster here. I have some thoughts on how we could make the ACC more feasible for all sports at Stanford. I'm just having trouble wrapping my head around the travel pressures we would be putting on non-football sports.

Idea #1: "The Reverse Notre Dame"

The ACC is unique in the sense that they've already negotiated football and non-football shares for payouts. I would propose joining the ACC for football only. It's just a lot easier to execute a football travel schedule compared to every other sport. The second facet of this agreement would be a contractual non-conference scheduling agreement for non-football sports that includes a reduced payout. I'm imagining a contract that guarantees 8ish non-con basketball games and 3 or 4 softball/baseball series, etc. Stanford would join the Big West, WCC, or go independent for other sports. 

This option would allow the non-football sports to maintain legitimacy and access to at-large bids with guaranteed games against strong ACC opponents in the non-conference.

Idea #2: "Gonzaga?"

If we are going to join the ACC for all sports, our non-football teams are really going to feel it for travel. Gonzaga could possibly be enticed by the opportunity to play the blue-bloods of the ACC basketball with local competition against Stanford and Cal. Even adding one more western team would be helpful in alleviating the pangs of cross-country travel. To illustrate, under a 20-game basketball conference schedule, the addition of Gonzaga would reduce games in the Eastern Time Zone from 9 to 8. That's at least one-less trip east.

(It's my first post, so I don't want to propose any ideas that would make me sound like a lunatic, but this option would be made even better by also adding basketball studs St. Mary's or perhaps AAU members like UC-Irvine or UCSB).

[CardInDSM]

Longtime lurker, first-time poster here. I have some thoughts on how we could make the ACC more feasible for all sports at Stanford. I'm just having trouble wrapping my head around the travel pressures we would be putting on non-football sports.

Idea #1: "The Reverse Notre Dame"

The ACC is unique in the sense that they've already negotiated football and non-football shares for payouts. I would propose joining the ACC for football only. It's just a lot easier to execute a football travel schedule compared to every other sport. The second facet of this agreement would be a contractual non-conference scheduling agreement for non-football sports that includes a reduced payout. I'm imagining a contract that guarantees 8ish non-con basketball games and 3 or 4 softball/baseball series, etc. Stanford would join the Big West, WCC, or go independent for other sports. 

This option would allow the non-football sports to maintain legitimacy and access to at-large bids with guaranteed games against strong ACC opponents in the non-conference.

Idea #2: "Gonzaga?"

If we are going to join the ACC for all sports, our non-football teams are really going to feel it for travel. Gonzaga could possibly be enticed by the opportunity to play the blue-bloods of the ACC basketball with local competition against Stanford and Cal. Even adding one more western team would be helpful in alleviating the pangs of cross-country travel. To illustrate, under a 20-game basketball conference schedule, the addition of Gonzaga would reduce games in the Eastern Time Zone from 9 to 8. That's at least one-less trip east.

(It's my first post, so I don't want to propose any ideas that would make me sound like a lunatic, but this option would be made even better by also adding basketball studs St. Mary's or perhaps AAU members like UC-Irvine or UCSB).

[martyup]

Welcome CardInDSM

[martyup]

Welcome CardInDSM

[msqueri]

Sadly I think it's wishful thinking to suggest that the travel issues can be substantially managed. We can try to mitigate them but it's unavoidable that it would be a massive additive cost to the athletic department and that it would be perennial, structural physical handicap for the athletes.

The body clock is the body clock. Human bodies and when in the day they're most ready to play football aren't things we can cheat. Something our great, good, mediocre, and bad coaches have in common is that they suck playing east. Let's go to the tape (times listed all Pacific):

1995 East Carolina (9am) - loss

1996 Wisconsin (9:30am) - loss

1996 Michigan State (11am) - win

1998 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

1999 Texas (9am) - loss

2000 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2002 Boston College (12:30pm) - loss

2002 Notre Dame (10:30am) - loss

2004 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2005 Navy (3pm) - eeked out a lethargic win, thank goodness it was so luckily late in the day

2006 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2008 TCU (10am) - loss

2008 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2009 Wake Forest (9am) - loss

2009 Oklahoma (11am) - loss

2010 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - win, and note that this is a somewhat later start time than previously in South Bend

2010 Virginia Tech (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others

2011 Duke (12:30pm) - win, and note that it's at least afternoon

2012 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2013 Army (9am) - win, albeit lethargic against an insanely outgunned service academy

2014 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2015 Northwestern (9am) - loss

2016 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - win, and note the MUCH later start time than any other previous game in South Bend

2016 North Carolina (11am) - win, albeit lethargic

2017 TCU (6pm) - loss

2018 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - loss

2018 Pitt (11am) - win

2019 UCF (12:30pm) - loss

2021 Vanderbilt (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others and against a terrible team

2022 Notre Dame (4:30pm)- win, and note the MUCH later start time than losses in South Bend

And that's to say nothing of football and basketball struggling even in Utah and Colorado.

It is what it is. I'm not saying this to criticize our administration. They didn't create time zones. Sometimes you have to play east, and in our current situation we may have to affiliate with a conference that will require a lot of travel east. As somebody who lives back east I love the chance to go to these games. I went to 13 of these in a row. It's good for the players, fans, and recruiting to not cloister ourselves in Palo Alto. But reality is reality. These games are extremely hard.

Shaw was actually really great at this, relatively speaking. Willingham was 1-5. Teevens was 0-3. Harris was 1-1 but never won in the morning. Harbaugh was 2-4 and never won in the morning. Shaw ended up 7-5 and had numerous wins in the morning. [I didn't include neutral site games here and I believe Shaw went 1-2 in neutral site morning games] While Shaw's track record is an encouraging sign that things can be done to give ourselves a fighting chance, note that 7-5 in road games out east compares extremely unfavorably to his 89-49 record in all other games combined.

This is what I can't get past. We would be consigning our players to a permanent, significant physical handicap that would make it very hard to field a .500 team.

Really have to make Big 10 work. That would be worse travel than now, but so much more manageable with 4-5 other former Pac-12 teams, and generally less far east for the rest too.

[msqueri]

Sadly I think it's wishful thinking to suggest that the travel issues can be substantially managed. We can try to mitigate them but it's unavoidable that it would be a massive additive cost to the athletic department and that it would be perennial, structural physical handicap for the athletes.

The body clock is the body clock. Human bodies and when in the day they're most ready to play football aren't things we can cheat. Something our great, good, mediocre, and bad coaches have in common is that they suck playing east. Let's go to the tape (times listed all Pacific):

1995 East Carolina (9am) - loss

1996 Wisconsin (9:30am) - loss

1996 Michigan State (11am) - win

1998 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

1999 Texas (9am) - loss

2000 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2002 Boston College (12:30pm) - loss

2002 Notre Dame (10:30am) - loss

2004 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2005 Navy (3pm) - eeked out a lethargic win, thank goodness it was so luckily late in the day

2006 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2008 TCU (10am) - loss

2008 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2009 Wake Forest (9am) - loss

2009 Oklahoma (11am) - loss

2010 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - win, and note that this is a somewhat later start time than previously in South Bend

2010 Virginia Tech (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others

2011 Duke (12:30pm) - win, and note that it's at least afternoon

2012 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2013 Army (9am) - win, albeit lethargic against an insanely outgunned service academy

2014 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2015 Northwestern (9am) - loss

2016 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - win, and note the MUCH later start time than any other previous game in South Bend

2016 North Carolina (11am) - win, albeit lethargic

2017 TCU (6pm) - loss

2018 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - loss

2018 Pitt (11am) - win

2019 UCF (12:30pm) - loss

2021 Vanderbilt (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others and against a terrible team

2022 Notre Dame (4:30pm)- win, and note the MUCH later start time than losses in South Bend

And that's to say nothing of football and basketball struggling even in Utah and Colorado.

It is what it is. I'm not saying this to criticize our administration. They didn't create time zones. Sometimes you have to play east, and in our current situation we may have to affiliate with a conference that will require a lot of travel east. As somebody who lives back east I love the chance to go to these games. I went to 13 of these in a row. It's good for the players, fans, and recruiting to not cloister ourselves in Palo Alto. But reality is reality. These games are extremely hard.

Shaw was actually really great at this, relatively speaking. Willingham was 1-5. Teevens was 0-3. Harris was 1-1 but never won in the morning. Harbaugh was 2-4 and never won in the morning. Shaw ended up 7-5 and had numerous wins in the morning. [I didn't include neutral site games here and I believe Shaw went 1-2 in neutral site morning games] While Shaw's track record is an encouraging sign that things can be done to give ourselves a fighting chance, note that 7-5 in road games out east compares extremely unfavorably to his 89-49 record in all other games combined.

This is what I can't get past. We would be consigning our players to a permanent, significant physical handicap that would make it very hard to field a .500 team.

Really have to make Big 10 work. That would be worse travel than now, but so much more manageable with 4-5 other former Pac-12 teams, and generally less far east for the rest too.

[gocard14]

Sadly I think it's wishful thinking to suggest that the travel issues can be substantially managed. We can try to mitigate them but it's unavoidable that it would be a massive additive cost to the athletic department and that it would be perennial, structural physical handicap for the athletes.

The body clock is the body clock. Human bodies and when in the day they're most ready to play football aren't things we can cheat. Something our great, good, mediocre, and bad coaches have in common is that they suck playing east. Let's go to the tape (times listed all Pacific):

1995 East Carolina (9am) - loss

1996 Wisconsin (9:30am) - loss

1996 Michigan State (11am) - win

1998 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

1999 Texas (9am) - loss

2000 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2002 Boston College (12:30pm) - loss

2002 Notre Dame (10:30am) - loss

2004 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2005 Navy (3pm) - eeked out a lethargic win, thank goodness it was so luckily late in the day

2006 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2008 TCU (10am) - loss

2008 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2009 Wake Forest (9am) - loss

2009 Oklahoma (11am) - loss

2010 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - win, and note that this is a somewhat later start time than previously in South Bend

2010 Virginia Tech (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others

2011 Duke (12:30pm) - win, and note that it's at least afternoon

2012 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2013 Army (9am) - win, albeit lethargic against an insanely outgunned service academy

2014 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2015 Northwestern (9am) - loss

2016 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - win, and note the MUCH later start time than any other previous game in South Bend

2016 North Carolina (11am) - win, albeit lethargic

2017 TCU (6pm) - loss

2018 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - loss

2018 Pitt (11am) - win

2019 UCF (12:30pm) - loss

2021 Vanderbilt (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others and against a terrible team

2022 Notre Dame (4:30pm)- win, and note the MUCH later start time than losses in South Bend

And that's to say nothing of football and basketball struggling even in Utah and Colorado.

It is what it is. I'm not saying this to criticize our administration. They didn't create time zones. Sometimes you have to play east, and in our current situation we may have to affiliate with a conference that will require a lot of travel east. As somebody who lives back east I love the chance to go to these games. I went to 13 of these in a row. It's good for the players, fans, and recruiting to not cloister ourselves in Palo Alto. But reality is reality. These games are extremely hard.

Shaw was actually really great at this, relatively speaking. Willingham was 1-5. Teevens was 0-3. Harris was 1-1 but never won in the morning. Harbaugh was 2-4 and never won in the morning. Shaw ended up 7-5 and had numerous wins in the morning. [I didn't include neutral site games here and I believe Shaw went 1-2 in neutral site morning games] While Shaw's track record is an encouraging sign that things can be done to give ourselves a fighting chance, note that 7-5 in road games out east compares extremely unfavorably to his 89-49 record in all other games combined.

This is what I can't get past. We would be consigning our players to a permanent, significant physical handicap that would make it very hard to field a .500 team.

Really have to make Big 10 work. That would be worse travel than now, but so much more manageable with 4-5 other former Pac-12 teams, and generally less far east for the rest too.

Yes playing on the east coast at 10AM on your body clock is a disadvantage. Conversely, BC flying over and playing at 11pm on their body clock is also a disadvantage. I'd argue between home and away games it generally evens out.

[gocard14]

Sadly I think it's wishful thinking to suggest that the travel issues can be substantially managed. We can try to mitigate them but it's unavoidable that it would be a massive additive cost to the athletic department and that it would be perennial, structural physical handicap for the athletes.

The body clock is the body clock. Human bodies and when in the day they're most ready to play football aren't things we can cheat. Something our great, good, mediocre, and bad coaches have in common is that they suck playing east. Let's go to the tape (times listed all Pacific):

1995 East Carolina (9am) - loss

1996 Wisconsin (9:30am) - loss

1996 Michigan State (11am) - win

1998 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

1999 Texas (9am) - loss

2000 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2002 Boston College (12:30pm) - loss

2002 Notre Dame (10:30am) - loss

2004 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2005 Navy (3pm) - eeked out a lethargic win, thank goodness it was so luckily late in the day

2006 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2008 TCU (10am) - loss

2008 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2009 Wake Forest (9am) - loss

2009 Oklahoma (11am) - loss

2010 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - win, and note that this is a somewhat later start time than previously in South Bend

2010 Virginia Tech (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others

2011 Duke (12:30pm) - win, and note that it's at least afternoon

2012 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2013 Army (9am) - win, albeit lethargic against an insanely outgunned service academy

2014 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2015 Northwestern (9am) - loss

2016 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - win, and note the MUCH later start time than any other previous game in South Bend

2016 North Carolina (11am) - win, albeit lethargic

2017 TCU (6pm) - loss

2018 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - loss

2018 Pitt (11am) - win

2019 UCF (12:30pm) - loss

2021 Vanderbilt (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others and against a terrible team

2022 Notre Dame (4:30pm)- win, and note the MUCH later start time than losses in South Bend

And that's to say nothing of football and basketball struggling even in Utah and Colorado.

It is what it is. I'm not saying this to criticize our administration. They didn't create time zones. Sometimes you have to play east, and in our current situation we may have to affiliate with a conference that will require a lot of travel east. As somebody who lives back east I love the chance to go to these games. I went to 13 of these in a row. It's good for the players, fans, and recruiting to not cloister ourselves in Palo Alto. But reality is reality. These games are extremely hard.

Shaw was actually really great at this, relatively speaking. Willingham was 1-5. Teevens was 0-3. Harris was 1-1 but never won in the morning. Harbaugh was 2-4 and never won in the morning. Shaw ended up 7-5 and had numerous wins in the morning. [I didn't include neutral site games here and I believe Shaw went 1-2 in neutral site morning games] While Shaw's track record is an encouraging sign that things can be done to give ourselves a fighting chance, note that 7-5 in road games out east compares extremely unfavorably to his 89-49 record in all other games combined.

This is what I can't get past. We would be consigning our players to a permanent, significant physical handicap that would make it very hard to field a .500 team.

Really have to make Big 10 work. That would be worse travel than now, but so much more manageable with 4-5 other former Pac-12 teams, and generally less far east for the rest too.

Yes playing on the east coast at 10AM on your body clock is a disadvantage. Conversely, BC flying over and playing at 11pm on their body clock is also a disadvantage. I'd argue between home and away games it generally evens out.

[CardinalSagehen]

2012 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss win

He scored.

[CardinalSagehen]

2012 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss win

He scored.

[old spanish trail]

2012 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss win

He scored.

Lol

---

Taylor comments after practice today per ESPN:

Stanford's Troy Taylor 'can't imagine anything' other than Power 5 football

Stanford expects some kind of resolution by the end of the week, sources told ESPN.


https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...thing-else

Per the article, no one in the admin has spoken with Troy.  Who is leading the effort to save Stanford sports?

One name mentioned is Bob Sternfels, Stanford water polo alum and current global manager of McKinsey.  Who else should be on the list?  Who is in charge of contacting these people to learn their interest in helping?

I wouldn’t be surprised if Stanford has hired McKinsey.  Resolving this in a week seems optimistic.

Sternfels' daughter is on the women's water polo team and his wife ran track at Stanford. Great guy.

[old spanish trail]

2012 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss win

He scored.

Lol

---

Taylor comments after practice today per ESPN:

Stanford's Troy Taylor 'can't imagine anything' other than Power 5 football

Stanford expects some kind of resolution by the end of the week, sources told ESPN.


https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...thing-else

Per the article, no one in the admin has spoken with Troy.  Who is leading the effort to save Stanford sports?

One name mentioned is Bob Sternfels, Stanford water polo alum and current global manager of McKinsey.  Who else should be on the list?  Who is in charge of contacting these people to learn their interest in helping?

I wouldn’t be surprised if Stanford has hired McKinsey.  Resolving this in a week seems optimistic.

Sternfels' daughter is on the women's water polo team and his wife ran track at Stanford. Great guy.

[Softball Fan]

Sadly I think it's wishful thinking to suggest that the travel issues can be substantially managed. We can try to mitigate them but it's unavoidable that it would be a massive additive cost to the athletic department and that it would be perennial, structural physical handicap for the athletes.

The body clock is the body clock. Human bodies and when in the day they're most ready to play football aren't things we can cheat. Something our great, good, mediocre, and bad coaches have in common is that they suck playing east. Let's go to the tape (times listed all Pacific):

1995 East Carolina (9am) - loss

1996 Wisconsin (9:30am) - loss

1996 Michigan State (11am) - win

1998 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

1999 Texas (9am) - loss

2000 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2002 Boston College (12:30pm) - loss

2002 Notre Dame (10:30am) - loss

2004 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2005 Navy (3pm) - eeked out a lethargic win, thank goodness it was so luckily late in the day

2006 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2008 TCU (10am) - loss

2008 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2009 Wake Forest (9am) - loss

2009 Oklahoma (11am) - loss

2010 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - win, and note that this is a somewhat later start time than previously in South Bend

2010 Virginia Tech (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others

2011 Duke (12:30pm) - win, and note that it's at least afternoon

2012 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2013 Army (9am) - win, albeit lethargic against an insanely outgunned service academy

2014 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2015 Northwestern (9am) - loss

2016 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - win, and note the MUCH later start time than any other previous game in South Bend

2016 North Carolina (11am) - win, albeit lethargic

2017 TCU (6pm) - loss

2018 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - loss

2018 Pitt (11am) - win

2019 UCF (12:30pm) - loss

2021 Vanderbilt (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others and against a terrible team

2022 Notre Dame (4:30pm)- win, and note the MUCH later start time than losses in South Bend

And that's to say nothing of football and basketball struggling even in Utah and Colorado.

It is what it is. I'm not saying this to criticize our administration. They didn't create time zones. Sometimes you have to play east, and in our current situation we may have to affiliate with a conference that will require a lot of travel east. As somebody who lives back east I love the chance to go to these games. I went to 13 of these in a row. It's good for the players, fans, and recruiting to not cloister ourselves in Palo Alto. But reality is reality. These games are extremely hard.

Shaw was actually really great at this, relatively speaking. Willingham was 1-5. Teevens was 0-3. Harris was 1-1 but never won in the morning. Harbaugh was 2-4 and never won in the morning. Shaw ended up 7-5 and had numerous wins in the morning. [I didn't include neutral site games here and I believe Shaw went 1-2 in neutral site morning games] While Shaw's track record is an encouraging sign that things can be done to give ourselves a fighting chance, note that 7-5 in road games out east compares extremely unfavorably to his 89-49 record in all other games combined.

This is what I can't get past. We would be consigning our players to a permanent, significant physical handicap that would make it very hard to field a .500 team.

Really have to make Big 10 work. That would be worse travel than now, but so much more manageable with 4-5 other former Pac-12 teams, and generally less far east for the rest too.

Couldn't there have been factors other than time zones that contributed to the losses you pointed out.  Playing on the road whether it be 100 miles or 4,000 miles puts a team at a disadvantage.  To convince me time zones are one of the biggest factors in determining wins or losses, I would have to see far more data points presented in an objective manner.

[Softball Fan]

Sadly I think it's wishful thinking to suggest that the travel issues can be substantially managed. We can try to mitigate them but it's unavoidable that it would be a massive additive cost to the athletic department and that it would be perennial, structural physical handicap for the athletes.

The body clock is the body clock. Human bodies and when in the day they're most ready to play football aren't things we can cheat. Something our great, good, mediocre, and bad coaches have in common is that they suck playing east. Let's go to the tape (times listed all Pacific):

1995 East Carolina (9am) - loss

1996 Wisconsin (9:30am) - loss

1996 Michigan State (11am) - win

1998 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

1999 Texas (9am) - loss

2000 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2002 Boston College (12:30pm) - loss

2002 Notre Dame (10:30am) - loss

2004 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2005 Navy (3pm) - eeked out a lethargic win, thank goodness it was so luckily late in the day

2006 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2008 TCU (10am) - loss

2008 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2009 Wake Forest (9am) - loss

2009 Oklahoma (11am) - loss

2010 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - win, and note that this is a somewhat later start time than previously in South Bend

2010 Virginia Tech (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others

2011 Duke (12:30pm) - win, and note that it's at least afternoon

2012 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2013 Army (9am) - win, albeit lethargic against an insanely outgunned service academy

2014 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2015 Northwestern (9am) - loss

2016 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - win, and note the MUCH later start time than any other previous game in South Bend

2016 North Carolina (11am) - win, albeit lethargic

2017 TCU (6pm) - loss

2018 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - loss

2018 Pitt (11am) - win

2019 UCF (12:30pm) - loss

2021 Vanderbilt (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others and against a terrible team

2022 Notre Dame (4:30pm)- win, and note the MUCH later start time than losses in South Bend

And that's to say nothing of football and basketball struggling even in Utah and Colorado.

It is what it is. I'm not saying this to criticize our administration. They didn't create time zones. Sometimes you have to play east, and in our current situation we may have to affiliate with a conference that will require a lot of travel east. As somebody who lives back east I love the chance to go to these games. I went to 13 of these in a row. It's good for the players, fans, and recruiting to not cloister ourselves in Palo Alto. But reality is reality. These games are extremely hard.

Shaw was actually really great at this, relatively speaking. Willingham was 1-5. Teevens was 0-3. Harris was 1-1 but never won in the morning. Harbaugh was 2-4 and never won in the morning. Shaw ended up 7-5 and had numerous wins in the morning. [I didn't include neutral site games here and I believe Shaw went 1-2 in neutral site morning games] While Shaw's track record is an encouraging sign that things can be done to give ourselves a fighting chance, note that 7-5 in road games out east compares extremely unfavorably to his 89-49 record in all other games combined.

This is what I can't get past. We would be consigning our players to a permanent, significant physical handicap that would make it very hard to field a .500 team.

Really have to make Big 10 work. That would be worse travel than now, but so much more manageable with 4-5 other former Pac-12 teams, and generally less far east for the rest too.

Couldn't there have been factors other than time zones that contributed to the losses you pointed out.  Playing on the road whether it be 100 miles or 4,000 miles puts a team at a disadvantage.  To convince me time zones are one of the biggest factors in determining wins or losses, I would have to see far more data points presented in an objective manner.

[msqueri]

Yes playing on the east coast at 10AM on your body clock is a disadvantage. Conversely, BC flying over and playing at 11pm on their body clock is also a disadvantage. I'd argue between home and away games it generally evens out.

Stanford would be doing this 4-6 times a season whereas the teams we'd be competing with in the standings would do it once or twice. The difference in individual rivalries could generally even out (though I don't think so) without that meaning the overall impact evens out. I think it's very wishful to think the team that is criss-crossing the country all fall will have the impacts even out compared to the team that only has to do one or two trips....which is everybody we'd be competing against. And that's to say nothing of how much worse it is for the body clock to fly east rather than to fly west. It's easier to delay your internal clock than to advance it. For these two reasons - more of our games would be travel-impaired than the teams we're competing with in the standings and it's worse to fly east - I do think this is a structural, perennial disadvantage. I think I still prefer it to trying to reconstitute the Pac-whatever or joining the Mountain West. As much as I can't get past the travel, it's even harder to get past moving out of major college football. But we should be real about how much this would suck.

By the way, I'm necessarily speaking in generalities here but the real impact would depend on circumstances and, particularly, the exact time of games. If we can be consistently playing at 4pm or later East Coast time (I suppose I can live with 3:30pm, which is more realistic) I would be thrilled and not consider it much of a disadvantage, certainly not so much that I'd bitch about Stanford finding a spot in a power conference. My issue is pragmatic. In real life game times will be determined by tv, and tv requires that games be spread throughout the day. This coming season the first Saturday of the season has ACC kickoffs from 12pm until 8pm (with two games at noon). The second week there are kickoffs scheduled from 11am until 8:30pm, with five games at noon or earlier. The third week it's 12pm to 7:30pm with three noon games.

If we're being realistic, the marquee slots will be at 3:30pm and later, so this really comes down to how good we are. If we have a program like we did from 2010-2018, we'd probably have a lot of games that are not much of a problem for our body clock because networks would want to televise us in good games. But if Stanford is a middling or worse program, how do we avoid noon (that is, for our players, 9am) kickoffs?

[msqueri]

Yes playing on the east coast at 10AM on your body clock is a disadvantage. Conversely, BC flying over and playing at 11pm on their body clock is also a disadvantage. I'd argue between home and away games it generally evens out.

Stanford would be doing this 4-6 times a season whereas the teams we'd be competing with in the standings would do it once or twice. The difference in individual rivalries could generally even out (though I don't think so) without that meaning the overall impact evens out. I think it's very wishful to think the team that is criss-crossing the country all fall will have the impacts even out compared to the team that only has to do one or two trips....which is everybody we'd be competing against. And that's to say nothing of how much worse it is for the body clock to fly east rather than to fly west. It's easier to delay your internal clock than to advance it. For these two reasons - more of our games would be travel-impaired than the teams we're competing with in the standings and it's worse to fly east - I do think this is a structural, perennial disadvantage. I think I still prefer it to trying to reconstitute the Pac-whatever or joining the Mountain West. As much as I can't get past the travel, it's even harder to get past moving out of major college football. But we should be real about how much this would suck.

By the way, I'm necessarily speaking in generalities here but the real impact would depend on circumstances and, particularly, the exact time of games. If we can be consistently playing at 4pm or later East Coast time (I suppose I can live with 3:30pm, which is more realistic) I would be thrilled and not consider it much of a disadvantage, certainly not so much that I'd bitch about Stanford finding a spot in a power conference. My issue is pragmatic. In real life game times will be determined by tv, and tv requires that games be spread throughout the day. This coming season the first Saturday of the season has ACC kickoffs from 12pm until 8pm (with two games at noon). The second week there are kickoffs scheduled from 11am until 8:30pm, with five games at noon or earlier. The third week it's 12pm to 7:30pm with three noon games.

If we're being realistic, the marquee slots will be at 3:30pm and later, so this really comes down to how good we are. If we have a program like we did from 2010-2018, we'd probably have a lot of games that are not much of a problem for our body clock because networks would want to televise us in good games. But if Stanford is a middling or worse program, how do we avoid noon (that is, for our players, 9am) kickoffs?

[Leftcoast]

To convince me time zones are one of the biggest factors in determining wins or losses, I would have to see far more data points presented in an objective manner.

I believe that's the wishful thinking MSQUERI mentions.

Of COURSE it's a factor.  We hope it can be mitigated

We've hated the early start timezone games for decades.  Multiple West Coast coaches in multiple sports from multiple schools complain about it.  This hasn't changed because we now like the ACC path.  The ACC may be our best path forward but we shouldn't pretend travel isn't an issue for student-athletes and their programs. (And not just in football which we're all using in our examples. The impact will be worse for many other sports.)

[Leftcoast]

To convince me time zones are one of the biggest factors in determining wins or losses, I would have to see far more data points presented in an objective manner.

I believe that's the wishful thinking MSQUERI mentions.

Of COURSE it's a factor.  We hope it can be mitigated

We've hated the early start timezone games for decades.  Multiple West Coast coaches in multiple sports from multiple schools complain about it.  This hasn't changed because we now like the ACC path.  The ACC may be our best path forward but we shouldn't pretend travel isn't an issue for student-athletes and their programs. (And not just in football which we're all using in our examples. The impact will be worse for many other sports.)

[jacket3ree]

We are already at a point of no great options. Big Ten is pipe dream stuff. We'd already be in ahead of Oregon and Washington if that was going to happen soon. Big Ten will hold out for Florida (State) and Moby Dick (ND) for years if necessary.  They grabbed the West Coast already - Stanford and Cal add nothing but placating the newbie PDT/PST teams a bit - and USC, which is the only one that might need placating - had enough heartburn with the Ducks; they will adamantly fight against two more California competitors, and they probably do view Cal and Stanford as recruiting threats.

The travel stuff is real. Stanford has been terrible at noon Eastern Time as Matt laid out.  But if you look at the years of those games, Stanford was just generally not strong, Teejer's blowout loss to the Horns during a Rose Bowl season notwithstanding. And candidly, that Rose Bowl team was not among Stanford's best.  )Still went toe to toe with Ron Daaaaaaayne in the overcast though.)

Stanford will screw this up. Too "good" for the Mountain West, which makes the most logistical sense.  Those teams survive on less than $30 million per annum and they don't seem all that sugardaddyish. Maybe not "good enough" for the ACC to make special ND-type arrangements and change their name to All Coastal Conference (and we hear ND is on a lake or something - close enough). Rumor abounds that they've already turned down the Big XII.

Probably wind up as a doom loop independent or scrappy Pac4+. There could be two divisions though. Oregon State and Washington State in the "Rock" division with Cal and Stanford in the "Hard Place" division.

Tell me we aren't effed.

[jacket3ree]

We are already at a point of no great options. Big Ten is pipe dream stuff. We'd already be in ahead of Oregon and Washington if that was going to happen soon. Big Ten will hold out for Florida (State) and Moby Dick (ND) for years if necessary.  They grabbed the West Coast already - Stanford and Cal add nothing but placating the newbie PDT/PST teams a bit - and USC, which is the only one that might need placating - had enough heartburn with the Ducks; they will adamantly fight against two more California competitors, and they probably do view Cal and Stanford as recruiting threats.

The travel stuff is real. Stanford has been terrible at noon Eastern Time as Matt laid out.  But if you look at the years of those games, Stanford was just generally not strong, Teejer's blowout loss to the Horns during a Rose Bowl season notwithstanding. And candidly, that Rose Bowl team was not among Stanford's best.  )Still went toe to toe with Ron Daaaaaaayne in the overcast though.)

Stanford will screw this up. Too "good" for the Mountain West, which makes the most logistical sense.  Those teams survive on less than $30 million per annum and they don't seem all that sugardaddyish. Maybe not "good enough" for the ACC to make special ND-type arrangements and change their name to All Coastal Conference (and we hear ND is on a lake or something - close enough). Rumor abounds that they've already turned down the Big XII.

Probably wind up as a doom loop independent or scrappy Pac4+. There could be two divisions though. Oregon State and Washington State in the "Rock" division with Cal and Stanford in the "Hard Place" division.

Tell me we aren't effed.

[Softball Fan]

To convince me time zones are one of the biggest factors in determining wins or losses, I would have to see far more data points presented in an objective manner.

I believe that's the wishful thinking MSQUERI mentions. 

Of COURSE it's a factor.  We hope it can be mitigated

We've hated the early start timezone games for decades.  Multiple West Coast coaches in multiple sports from multiple schools complain about it.  This hasn't changed because we now like the ACC path.  The ACC may be our best path forward but we shouldn't pretend travel isn't an issue for student-athletes and their programs.  (And not just in football which we're all using in our examples.  The impact will be worse for many other sports.)

That's not my point.  I've traveled to the east coast more times than I can remember.  Travel is a factor.   So is playing at altitude at Colorado and Utah for some sports.   My issue was directing equating losses to the crossing of time zones.

[Softball Fan]

To convince me time zones are one of the biggest factors in determining wins or losses, I would have to see far more data points presented in an objective manner.

I believe that's the wishful thinking MSQUERI mentions. 

Of COURSE it's a factor.  We hope it can be mitigated

We've hated the early start timezone games for decades.  Multiple West Coast coaches in multiple sports from multiple schools complain about it.  This hasn't changed because we now like the ACC path.  The ACC may be our best path forward but we shouldn't pretend travel isn't an issue for student-athletes and their programs.  (And not just in football which we're all using in our examples.  The impact will be worse for many other sports.)

That's not my point.  I've traveled to the east coast more times than I can remember.  Travel is a factor.   So is playing at altitude at Colorado and Utah for some sports.   My issue was directing equating losses to the crossing of time zones.

[msqueri]

To convince me time zones are one of the biggest factors in determining wins or losses, I would have to see far more data points presented in an objective manner.

I believe that's the wishful thinking MSQUERI mentions. 

Of COURSE it's a factor.  We hope it can be mitigated

We've hated the early start timezone games for decades.  Multiple West Coast coaches in multiple sports from multiple schools complain about it.  This hasn't changed because we now like the ACC path.  The ACC may be our best path forward but we shouldn't pretend travel isn't an issue for student-athletes and their programs.  (And not just in football which we're all using in our examples.  The impact will be worse for many other sports.)

That's not my point.  I've traveled to the east coast more times than I can remember.  Travel is a factor.   So is playing at altitude at Colorado and Utah for some sports.   My issue was directing equating losses to the crossing of time zones.

In case it wasn't clear, I wasn't trying to directly equate losses to crossing time zones but rather to go back as far as was practicable to get as many data points as I could of what the historic effect has been for Stanford so we could get an impressionistic sense of the direction of the effect. Absolutely we can't say which losses would or would not have occurred without time zones, or that we lost because of time zones rather than because of chance or merely being the worse team. But IMHO David Shaw going 7-6 when he was 89-49 otherwise, Harbaugh going 2-4 when he was 27-17 otherwise, Teevens going 0-3 when he was 10-20 otherwise, and Willingham going 1-5 when he was 43-31-1 otherwise is very suggestive. I don't have the training or inclination to do some other analysis controlling for various variables, my point is just that if you look at how we do with travel requiring early body clock times it's really, quite obviously, not good. Clearly much worse than the norm for literally every coach I have data for (excluding Harris as he only coached two of these games but if you wanted to include him he's the exception that proves the rule).

[msqueri]

To convince me time zones are one of the biggest factors in determining wins or losses, I would have to see far more data points presented in an objective manner.

I believe that's the wishful thinking MSQUERI mentions. 

Of COURSE it's a factor.  We hope it can be mitigated

We've hated the early start timezone games for decades.  Multiple West Coast coaches in multiple sports from multiple schools complain about it.  This hasn't changed because we now like the ACC path.  The ACC may be our best path forward but we shouldn't pretend travel isn't an issue for student-athletes and their programs.  (And not just in football which we're all using in our examples.  The impact will be worse for many other sports.)

That's not my point.  I've traveled to the east coast more times than I can remember.  Travel is a factor.   So is playing at altitude at Colorado and Utah for some sports.   My issue was directing equating losses to the crossing of time zones.

In case it wasn't clear, I wasn't trying to directly equate losses to crossing time zones but rather to go back as far as was practicable to get as many data points as I could of what the historic effect has been for Stanford so we could get an impressionistic sense of the direction of the effect. Absolutely we can't say which losses would or would not have occurred without time zones, or that we lost because of time zones rather than because of chance or merely being the worse team. But IMHO David Shaw going 7-6 when he was 89-49 otherwise, Harbaugh going 2-4 when he was 27-17 otherwise, Teevens going 0-3 when he was 10-20 otherwise, and Willingham going 1-5 when he was 43-31-1 otherwise is very suggestive. I don't have the training or inclination to do some other analysis controlling for various variables, my point is just that if you look at how we do with travel requiring early body clock times it's really, quite obviously, not good. Clearly much worse than the norm for literally every coach I have data for (excluding Harris as he only coached two of these games but if you wanted to include him he's the exception that proves the rule).

[Mick]

Sadly I think it's wishful thinking to suggest that the travel issues can be substantially managed. We can try to mitigate them but it's unavoidable that it would be a massive additive cost to the athletic department and that it would be perennial, structural physical handicap for the athletes.

The body clock is the body clock. Human bodies and when in the day they're most ready to play football aren't things we can cheat. Something our great, good, mediocre, and bad coaches have in common is that they suck playing east. Let's go to the tape (times listed all Pacific):

1995 East Carolina (9am) - loss

1996 Wisconsin (9:30am) - loss

1996 Michigan State (11am) - win

1998 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

1999 Texas (9am) - loss

2000 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2002 Boston College (12:30pm) - loss

2002 Notre Dame (10:30am) - loss

2004 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2005 Navy (3pm) - eeked out a lethargic win, thank goodness it was so luckily late in the day

2006 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2008 TCU (10am) - loss

2008 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2009 Wake Forest (9am) - loss

2009 Oklahoma (11am) - loss

2010 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - win, and note that this is a somewhat later start time than previously in South Bend

2010 Virginia Tech (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others

2011 Duke (12:30pm) - win, and note that it's at least afternoon

2012 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2013 Army (9am) - win, albeit lethargic against an insanely outgunned service academy

2014 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2015 Northwestern (9am) - loss

2016 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - win, and note the MUCH later start time than any other previous game in South Bend

2016 North Carolina (11am) - win, albeit lethargic

2017 TCU (6pm) - loss

2018 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - loss

2018 Pitt (11am) - win

2019 UCF (12:30pm) - loss

2021 Vanderbilt (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others and against a terrible team

2022 Notre Dame (4:30pm)- win, and note the MUCH later start time than losses in South Bend

And that's to say nothing of football and basketball struggling even in Utah and Colorado.

It is what it is. I'm not saying this to criticize our administration. They didn't create time zones. Sometimes you have to play east, and in our current situation we may have to affiliate with a conference that will require a lot of travel east. As somebody who lives back east I love the chance to go to these games. I went to 13 of these in a row. It's good for the players, fans, and recruiting to not cloister ourselves in Palo Alto. But reality is reality. These games are extremely hard.

Shaw was actually really great at this, relatively speaking. Willingham was 1-5. Teevens was 0-3. Harris was 1-1 but never won in the morning. Harbaugh was 2-4 and never won in the morning. Shaw ended up 7-5 and had numerous wins in the morning. [I didn't include neutral site games here and I believe Shaw went 1-2 in neutral site morning games] While Shaw's track record is an encouraging sign that things can be done to give ourselves a fighting chance, note that 7-5 in road games out east compares extremely unfavorably to his 89-49 record in all other games combined.

This is what I can't get past. We would be consigning our players to a permanent, significant physical handicap that would make it very hard to field a .500 team.

Really have to make Big 10 work. That would be worse travel than now, but so much more manageable with 4-5 other former Pac-12 teams, and generally less far east for the rest too.

Body clock time is a real thing. Three time zones east is very difficult to get over, particularly if played before 1 p.m. body clock time.

My challenge with the Big 10 is that the dead sexy football schools are in the B1G-10 East (Mich, MSU, tOSU, Penn St, Maryland...and also Rutgers and Indiana). If we matched up with the Central zone B1G 10 schools, it's Illinois, Iowa, Minn, Nebr., NW, Purdue and Wisconsin. In other words, the central schools are yawners. Yeah, we didn't get much attendance for the Oregon State game. What kind of attendance would we get for Ill/Iowa/Minn?

If we got to the point where we would only play 2-3 games out of our time zone, then we could schedule them consecutively before school starts. That would be ideal.

[Mick]

Sadly I think it's wishful thinking to suggest that the travel issues can be substantially managed. We can try to mitigate them but it's unavoidable that it would be a massive additive cost to the athletic department and that it would be perennial, structural physical handicap for the athletes.

The body clock is the body clock. Human bodies and when in the day they're most ready to play football aren't things we can cheat. Something our great, good, mediocre, and bad coaches have in common is that they suck playing east. Let's go to the tape (times listed all Pacific):

1995 East Carolina (9am) - loss

1996 Wisconsin (9:30am) - loss

1996 Michigan State (11am) - win

1998 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

1999 Texas (9am) - loss

2000 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2002 Boston College (12:30pm) - loss

2002 Notre Dame (10:30am) - loss

2004 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2005 Navy (3pm) - eeked out a lethargic win, thank goodness it was so luckily late in the day

2006 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2008 TCU (10am) - loss

2008 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2009 Wake Forest (9am) - loss

2009 Oklahoma (11am) - loss

2010 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - win, and note that this is a somewhat later start time than previously in South Bend

2010 Virginia Tech (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others

2011 Duke (12:30pm) - win, and note that it's at least afternoon

2012 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2013 Army (9am) - win, albeit lethargic against an insanely outgunned service academy

2014 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2015 Northwestern (9am) - loss

2016 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - win, and note the MUCH later start time than any other previous game in South Bend

2016 North Carolina (11am) - win, albeit lethargic

2017 TCU (6pm) - loss

2018 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - loss

2018 Pitt (11am) - win

2019 UCF (12:30pm) - loss

2021 Vanderbilt (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others and against a terrible team

2022 Notre Dame (4:30pm)- win, and note the MUCH later start time than losses in South Bend

And that's to say nothing of football and basketball struggling even in Utah and Colorado.

It is what it is. I'm not saying this to criticize our administration. They didn't create time zones. Sometimes you have to play east, and in our current situation we may have to affiliate with a conference that will require a lot of travel east. As somebody who lives back east I love the chance to go to these games. I went to 13 of these in a row. It's good for the players, fans, and recruiting to not cloister ourselves in Palo Alto. But reality is reality. These games are extremely hard.

Shaw was actually really great at this, relatively speaking. Willingham was 1-5. Teevens was 0-3. Harris was 1-1 but never won in the morning. Harbaugh was 2-4 and never won in the morning. Shaw ended up 7-5 and had numerous wins in the morning. [I didn't include neutral site games here and I believe Shaw went 1-2 in neutral site morning games] While Shaw's track record is an encouraging sign that things can be done to give ourselves a fighting chance, note that 7-5 in road games out east compares extremely unfavorably to his 89-49 record in all other games combined.

This is what I can't get past. We would be consigning our players to a permanent, significant physical handicap that would make it very hard to field a .500 team.

Really have to make Big 10 work. That would be worse travel than now, but so much more manageable with 4-5 other former Pac-12 teams, and generally less far east for the rest too.

Body clock time is a real thing. Three time zones east is very difficult to get over, particularly if played before 1 p.m. body clock time.

My challenge with the Big 10 is that the dead sexy football schools are in the B1G-10 East (Mich, MSU, tOSU, Penn St, Maryland...and also Rutgers and Indiana). If we matched up with the Central zone B1G 10 schools, it's Illinois, Iowa, Minn, Nebr., NW, Purdue and Wisconsin. In other words, the central schools are yawners. Yeah, we didn't get much attendance for the Oregon State game. What kind of attendance would we get for Ill/Iowa/Minn?

If we got to the point where we would only play 2-3 games out of our time zone, then we could schedule them consecutively before school starts. That would be ideal.

[Giants]

Sadly I think it's wishful thinking to suggest that the travel issues can be substantially managed. We can try to mitigate them but it's unavoidable that it would be a massive additive cost to the athletic department and that it would be perennial, structural physical handicap for the athletes.

The body clock is the body clock. Human bodies and when in the day they're most ready to play football aren't things we can cheat. Something our great, good, mediocre, and bad coaches have in common is that they suck playing east. Let's go to the tape (times listed all Pacific):

1995 East Carolina (9am) - loss

1996 Wisconsin (9:30am) - loss

1996 Michigan State (11am) - win

1998 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

1999 Texas (9am) - loss

2000 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2002 Boston College (12:30pm) - loss

2002 Notre Dame (10:30am) - loss

2004 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2005 Navy (3pm) - eeked out a lethargic win, thank goodness it was so luckily late in the day

2006 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2008 TCU (10am) - loss

2008 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2009 Wake Forest (9am) - loss

2009 Oklahoma (11am) - loss

2010 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - win, and note that this is a somewhat later start time than previously in South Bend

2010 Virginia Tech (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others

2011 Duke (12:30pm) - win, and note that it's at least afternoon

2012 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2013 Army (9am) - win, albeit lethargic against an insanely outgunned service academy

2014 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2015 Northwestern (9am) - loss

2016 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - win, and note the MUCH later start time than any other previous game in South Bend

2016 North Carolina (11am) - win, albeit lethargic

2017 TCU (6pm) - loss

2018 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - loss

2018 Pitt (11am) - win

2019 UCF (12:30pm) - loss

2021 Vanderbilt (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others and against a terrible team

2022 Notre Dame (4:30pm)- win, and note the MUCH later start time than losses in South Bend

And that's to say nothing of football and basketball struggling even in Utah and Colorado.

It is what it is. I'm not saying this to criticize our administration. They didn't create time zones. Sometimes you have to play east, and in our current situation we may have to affiliate with a conference that will require a lot of travel east. As somebody who lives back east I love the chance to go to these games. I went to 13 of these in a row. It's good for the players, fans, and recruiting to not cloister ourselves in Palo Alto. But reality is reality. These games are extremely hard.

Shaw was actually really great at this, relatively speaking. Willingham was 1-5. Teevens was 0-3. Harris was 1-1 but never won in the morning. Harbaugh was 2-4 and never won in the morning. Shaw ended up 7-5 and had numerous wins in the morning. [I didn't include neutral site games here and I believe Shaw went 1-2 in neutral site morning games] While Shaw's track record is an encouraging sign that things can be done to give ourselves a fighting chance, note that 7-5 in road games out east compares extremely unfavorably to his 89-49 record in all other games combined.

This is what I can't get past. We would be consigning our players to a permanent, significant physical handicap that would make it very hard to field a .500 team.

Really have to make Big 10 work. That would be worse travel than now, but so much more manageable with 4-5 other former Pac-12 teams, and generally less far east for the rest too.

Body clock time is a real thing. Three time zones east is very difficult to get over, particularly if played before 1 p.m. body clock time.

My challenge with the Big 10 is that the dead sexy football schools are in the B1G-10 East (Mich, MSU, tOSU, Penn St, Maryland...and also Rutgers and Indiana). If we matched up with the Central zone B1G 10 schools, it's Illinois, Iowa, Minn, Nebr., NW, Purdue and Wisconsin. In other words, the central schools are yawners. Yeah, we didn't get much attendance for the Oregon State game. What kind of attendance would we get for Ill/Iowa/Minn?

If we got to the point where we would only play 2-3 games out of our time zone, then we could schedule them consecutively before school starts. That would be ideal.

The Big Ten is eliminating divisions effective 2024.


Also, the latest gossip - Stanford/Cal football and M/W hoops to ACC.  All other sports to WCC.

[Giants]

Sadly I think it's wishful thinking to suggest that the travel issues can be substantially managed. We can try to mitigate them but it's unavoidable that it would be a massive additive cost to the athletic department and that it would be perennial, structural physical handicap for the athletes.

The body clock is the body clock. Human bodies and when in the day they're most ready to play football aren't things we can cheat. Something our great, good, mediocre, and bad coaches have in common is that they suck playing east. Let's go to the tape (times listed all Pacific):

1995 East Carolina (9am) - loss

1996 Wisconsin (9:30am) - loss

1996 Michigan State (11am) - win

1998 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

1999 Texas (9am) - loss

2000 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2002 Boston College (12:30pm) - loss

2002 Notre Dame (10:30am) - loss

2004 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2005 Navy (3pm) - eeked out a lethargic win, thank goodness it was so luckily late in the day

2006 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2008 TCU (10am) - loss

2008 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2009 Wake Forest (9am) - loss

2009 Oklahoma (11am) - loss

2010 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - win, and note that this is a somewhat later start time than previously in South Bend

2010 Virginia Tech (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others

2011 Duke (12:30pm) - win, and note that it's at least afternoon

2012 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2013 Army (9am) - win, albeit lethargic against an insanely outgunned service academy

2014 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2015 Northwestern (9am) - loss

2016 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - win, and note the MUCH later start time than any other previous game in South Bend

2016 North Carolina (11am) - win, albeit lethargic

2017 TCU (6pm) - loss

2018 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - loss

2018 Pitt (11am) - win

2019 UCF (12:30pm) - loss

2021 Vanderbilt (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others and against a terrible team

2022 Notre Dame (4:30pm)- win, and note the MUCH later start time than losses in South Bend

And that's to say nothing of football and basketball struggling even in Utah and Colorado.

It is what it is. I'm not saying this to criticize our administration. They didn't create time zones. Sometimes you have to play east, and in our current situation we may have to affiliate with a conference that will require a lot of travel east. As somebody who lives back east I love the chance to go to these games. I went to 13 of these in a row. It's good for the players, fans, and recruiting to not cloister ourselves in Palo Alto. But reality is reality. These games are extremely hard.

Shaw was actually really great at this, relatively speaking. Willingham was 1-5. Teevens was 0-3. Harris was 1-1 but never won in the morning. Harbaugh was 2-4 and never won in the morning. Shaw ended up 7-5 and had numerous wins in the morning. [I didn't include neutral site games here and I believe Shaw went 1-2 in neutral site morning games] While Shaw's track record is an encouraging sign that things can be done to give ourselves a fighting chance, note that 7-5 in road games out east compares extremely unfavorably to his 89-49 record in all other games combined.

This is what I can't get past. We would be consigning our players to a permanent, significant physical handicap that would make it very hard to field a .500 team.

Really have to make Big 10 work. That would be worse travel than now, but so much more manageable with 4-5 other former Pac-12 teams, and generally less far east for the rest too.

Body clock time is a real thing. Three time zones east is very difficult to get over, particularly if played before 1 p.m. body clock time.

My challenge with the Big 10 is that the dead sexy football schools are in the B1G-10 East (Mich, MSU, tOSU, Penn St, Maryland...and also Rutgers and Indiana). If we matched up with the Central zone B1G 10 schools, it's Illinois, Iowa, Minn, Nebr., NW, Purdue and Wisconsin. In other words, the central schools are yawners. Yeah, we didn't get much attendance for the Oregon State game. What kind of attendance would we get for Ill/Iowa/Minn?

If we got to the point where we would only play 2-3 games out of our time zone, then we could schedule them consecutively before school starts. That would be ideal.

The Big Ten is eliminating divisions effective 2024.


Also, the latest gossip - Stanford/Cal football and M/W hoops to ACC.  All other sports to WCC.

[Maple Leaf]

Sadly I think it's wishful thinking to suggest that the travel issues can be substantially managed. We can try to mitigate them but it's unavoidable that it would be a massive additive cost to the athletic department and that it would be perennial, structural physical handicap for the athletes.

The body clock is the body clock. Human bodies and when in the day they're most ready to play football aren't things we can cheat. Something our great, good, mediocre, and bad coaches have in common is that they suck playing east. Let's go to the tape (times listed all Pacific):

1995 East Carolina (9am) - loss

1996 Wisconsin (9:30am) - loss

1996 Michigan State (11am) - win

1998 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

1999 Texas (9am) - loss

2000 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2002 Boston College (12:30pm) - loss

2002 Notre Dame (10:30am) - loss

2004 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2005 Navy (3pm) - eeked out a lethargic win, thank goodness it was so luckily late in the day

2006 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2008 TCU (10am) - loss

2008 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2009 Wake Forest (9am) - loss

2009 Oklahoma (11am) - loss

2010 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - win, and note that this is a somewhat later start time than previously in South Bend

2010 Virginia Tech (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others

2011 Duke (12:30pm) - win, and note that it's at least afternoon

2012 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2013 Army (9am) - win, albeit lethargic against an insanely outgunned service academy

2014 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2015 Northwestern (9am) - loss

2016 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - win, and note the MUCH later start time than any other previous game in South Bend

2016 North Carolina (11am) - win, albeit lethargic

2017 TCU (6pm) - loss

2018 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - loss

2018 Pitt (11am) - win

2019 UCF (12:30pm) - loss

2021 Vanderbilt (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others and against a terrible team

2022 Notre Dame (4:30pm)- win, and note the MUCH later start time than losses in South Bend

And that's to say nothing of football and basketball struggling even in Utah and Colorado.

It is what it is. I'm not saying this to criticize our administration. They didn't create time zones. Sometimes you have to play east, and in our current situation we may have to affiliate with a conference that will require a lot of travel east. As somebody who lives back east I love the chance to go to these games. I went to 13 of these in a row. It's good for the players, fans, and recruiting to not cloister ourselves in Palo Alto. But reality is reality. These games are extremely hard.

Shaw was actually really great at this, relatively speaking. Willingham was 1-5. Teevens was 0-3. Harris was 1-1 but never won in the morning. Harbaugh was 2-4 and never won in the morning. Shaw ended up 7-5 and had numerous wins in the morning. [I didn't include neutral site games here and I believe Shaw went 1-2 in neutral site morning games] While Shaw's track record is an encouraging sign that things can be done to give ourselves a fighting chance, note that 7-5 in road games out east compares extremely unfavorably to his 89-49 record in all other games combined.

This is what I can't get past. We would be consigning our players to a permanent, significant physical handicap that would make it very hard to field a .500 team.

Really have to make Big 10 work. That would be worse travel than now, but so much more manageable with 4-5 other former Pac-12 teams, and generally less far east for the rest too.

Body clock time is a real thing. Three time zones east is very difficult to get over, particularly if played before 1 p.m. body clock time.

My challenge with the Big 10 is that the dead sexy football schools are in the B1G-10 East (Mich, MSU, tOSU, Penn St, Maryland...and also Rutgers and Indiana). If we matched up with the Central zone B1G 10 schools, it's Illinois, Iowa, Minn, Nebr., NW, Purdue and Wisconsin. In other words, the central schools are yawners. Yeah, we didn't get much attendance for the Oregon State game. What kind of attendance would we get for Ill/Iowa/Minn?

If we got to the point where we would only play 2-3 games out of our time zone, then we could schedule them consecutively before school starts. That would be ideal.

Totally agree on travel and scheduling.  Out of respect for the student athlete travel should be restricted to one time zone while school is in session (except for post season).

[Maple Leaf]

Sadly I think it's wishful thinking to suggest that the travel issues can be substantially managed. We can try to mitigate them but it's unavoidable that it would be a massive additive cost to the athletic department and that it would be perennial, structural physical handicap for the athletes.

The body clock is the body clock. Human bodies and when in the day they're most ready to play football aren't things we can cheat. Something our great, good, mediocre, and bad coaches have in common is that they suck playing east. Let's go to the tape (times listed all Pacific):

1995 East Carolina (9am) - loss

1996 Wisconsin (9:30am) - loss

1996 Michigan State (11am) - win

1998 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

1999 Texas (9am) - loss

2000 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2002 Boston College (12:30pm) - loss

2002 Notre Dame (10:30am) - loss

2004 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2005 Navy (3pm) - eeked out a lethargic win, thank goodness it was so luckily late in the day

2006 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2008 TCU (10am) - loss

2008 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2009 Wake Forest (9am) - loss

2009 Oklahoma (11am) - loss

2010 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - win, and note that this is a somewhat later start time than previously in South Bend

2010 Virginia Tech (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others

2011 Duke (12:30pm) - win, and note that it's at least afternoon

2012 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2013 Army (9am) - win, albeit lethargic against an insanely outgunned service academy

2014 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2015 Northwestern (9am) - loss

2016 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - win, and note the MUCH later start time than any other previous game in South Bend

2016 North Carolina (11am) - win, albeit lethargic

2017 TCU (6pm) - loss

2018 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - loss

2018 Pitt (11am) - win

2019 UCF (12:30pm) - loss

2021 Vanderbilt (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others and against a terrible team

2022 Notre Dame (4:30pm)- win, and note the MUCH later start time than losses in South Bend

And that's to say nothing of football and basketball struggling even in Utah and Colorado.

It is what it is. I'm not saying this to criticize our administration. They didn't create time zones. Sometimes you have to play east, and in our current situation we may have to affiliate with a conference that will require a lot of travel east. As somebody who lives back east I love the chance to go to these games. I went to 13 of these in a row. It's good for the players, fans, and recruiting to not cloister ourselves in Palo Alto. But reality is reality. These games are extremely hard.

Shaw was actually really great at this, relatively speaking. Willingham was 1-5. Teevens was 0-3. Harris was 1-1 but never won in the morning. Harbaugh was 2-4 and never won in the morning. Shaw ended up 7-5 and had numerous wins in the morning. [I didn't include neutral site games here and I believe Shaw went 1-2 in neutral site morning games] While Shaw's track record is an encouraging sign that things can be done to give ourselves a fighting chance, note that 7-5 in road games out east compares extremely unfavorably to his 89-49 record in all other games combined.

This is what I can't get past. We would be consigning our players to a permanent, significant physical handicap that would make it very hard to field a .500 team.

Really have to make Big 10 work. That would be worse travel than now, but so much more manageable with 4-5 other former Pac-12 teams, and generally less far east for the rest too.

Body clock time is a real thing. Three time zones east is very difficult to get over, particularly if played before 1 p.m. body clock time.

My challenge with the Big 10 is that the dead sexy football schools are in the B1G-10 East (Mich, MSU, tOSU, Penn St, Maryland...and also Rutgers and Indiana). If we matched up with the Central zone B1G 10 schools, it's Illinois, Iowa, Minn, Nebr., NW, Purdue and Wisconsin. In other words, the central schools are yawners. Yeah, we didn't get much attendance for the Oregon State game. What kind of attendance would we get for Ill/Iowa/Minn?

If we got to the point where we would only play 2-3 games out of our time zone, then we could schedule them consecutively before school starts. That would be ideal.

Totally agree on travel and scheduling.  Out of respect for the student athlete travel should be restricted to one time zone while school is in session (except for post season).

[SkiBum80]

The Big Ten eliminating divisions effective 2024.


Also, the latest gossip - Stanford/Cal football and M/W hoops to ACC.  All other sports to WCC.

I hope there is truth to that rumor.
Coach TT already said two things: He wants and expects to play Power 5(4) football. He is willing to travel to do it.
The alternative, of Not playing football in a Power conference would likely create a cascading flow of Stanford sports letdowns and pull backs.
First with football, we'd start losing top recruits, current and future. 
I would expect TT himself, if successful, to look to move on elsewhere, somewhere in Power football.
The funds from football rights would greatly diminish, cutting back both on football program, and nothing much, if any, leftover to support other sports.
The sudden hole in Ath dept would presumably be $20 mil or more. 
Other non revenue sports would be looked at as possibly needing to be cut.
Like they were not long ago, before pulled back from the brink at last moment.
They are wonderful to have and help win the Directors cup and create prestige for Stanford and are a giant feed into the US Olympic team, but who pays for them?
Not much satisfaction in having achieved a convenient SA travel schedule if it leads to cutting out the sport entirely as being no longer affordable.

Disclaimer: a near term wild card regarding finances remains the NCAA credits to PAC 12 which I don't know how and under what terms Stanford remains entitled to any of it.

[SkiBum80]

The Big Ten eliminating divisions effective 2024.


Also, the latest gossip - Stanford/Cal football and M/W hoops to ACC.  All other sports to WCC.

I hope there is truth to that rumor.
Coach TT already said two things: He wants and expects to play Power 5(4) football. He is willing to travel to do it.
The alternative, of Not playing football in a Power conference would likely create a cascading flow of Stanford sports letdowns and pull backs.
First with football, we'd start losing top recruits, current and future. 
I would expect TT himself, if successful, to look to move on elsewhere, somewhere in Power football.
The funds from football rights would greatly diminish, cutting back both on football program, and nothing much, if any, leftover to support other sports.
The sudden hole in Ath dept would presumably be $20 mil or more. 
Other non revenue sports would be looked at as possibly needing to be cut.
Like they were not long ago, before pulled back from the brink at last moment.
They are wonderful to have and help win the Directors cup and create prestige for Stanford and are a giant feed into the US Olympic team, but who pays for them?
Not much satisfaction in having achieved a convenient SA travel schedule if it leads to cutting out the sport entirely as being no longer affordable.

Disclaimer: a near term wild card regarding finances remains the NCAA credits to PAC 12 which I don't know how and under what terms Stanford remains entitled to any of it.

[oman]

If travel is such an issue, why not simply build/rent a football training camp in a location to minimize travel issues and let the players take virtual classes from that location during fall quarter?

Could probably cut some very interesting deals in good recruiting areas or simply interesting locations.

[oman]

If travel is such an issue, why not simply build/rent a football training camp in a location to minimize travel issues and let the players take virtual classes from that location during fall quarter?

Could probably cut some very interesting deals in good recruiting areas or simply interesting locations.

[burger]

The Big Ten is eliminating divisions effective 2024.

Also, the latest gossip - Stanford/Cal football and M/W hoops to ACC.  All other sports to WCC.

Oy, they'd better effing not relegate baseball and softball to the WCC.

ACC baseball was the #2 conference this year.  WCC was #18.

I couldn't find softball conference rankings, but the top ACC team was #4 in RPI this year.  The top WCC team was #61.

[burger]

The Big Ten is eliminating divisions effective 2024.

Also, the latest gossip - Stanford/Cal football and M/W hoops to ACC.  All other sports to WCC.

Oy, they'd better effing not relegate baseball and softball to the WCC.

ACC baseball was the #2 conference this year.  WCC was #18.

I couldn't find softball conference rankings, but the top ACC team was #4 in RPI this year.  The top WCC team was #61.

[Jamesy]

Sadly I think it's wishful thinking to suggest that the travel issues can be substantially managed. We can try to mitigate them but it's unavoidable that it would be a massive additive cost to the athletic department and that it would be perennial, structural physical handicap for the athletes.

The body clock is the body clock. Human bodies and when in the day they're most ready to play football aren't things we can cheat. Something our great, good, mediocre, and bad coaches have in common is that they suck playing east. Let's go to the tape (times listed all Pacific):

1995 East Carolina (9am) - loss

1996 Wisconsin (9:30am) - loss

1996 Michigan State (11am) - win

1998 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

1999 Texas (9am) - loss

2000 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2002 Boston College (12:30pm) - loss

2002 Notre Dame (10:30am) - loss

2004 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2005 Navy (3pm) - eeked out a lethargic win, thank goodness it was so luckily late in the day

2006 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2008 TCU (10am) - loss

2008 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2009 Wake Forest (9am) - loss

2009 Oklahoma (11am) - loss

2010 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - win, and note that this is a somewhat later start time than previously in South Bend

2010 Virginia Tech (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others

2011 Duke (12:30pm) - win, and note that it's at least afternoon

2012 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2013 Army (9am) - win, albeit lethargic against an insanely outgunned service academy

2014 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2015 Northwestern (9am) - loss

2016 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - win, and note the MUCH later start time than any other previous game in South Bend

2016 North Carolina (11am) - win, albeit lethargic

2017 TCU (6pm) - loss

2018 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - loss

2018 Pitt (11am) - win

2019 UCF (12:30pm) - loss

2021 Vanderbilt (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others and against a terrible team

2022 Notre Dame (4:30pm)- win, and note the MUCH later start time than losses in South Bend

And that's to say nothing of football and basketball struggling even in Utah and Colorado.

It is what it is. I'm not saying this to criticize our administration. They didn't create time zones. Sometimes you have to play east, and in our current situation we may have to affiliate with a conference that will require a lot of travel east. As somebody who lives back east I love the chance to go to these games. I went to 13 of these in a row. It's good for the players, fans, and recruiting to not cloister ourselves in Palo Alto. But reality is reality. These games are extremely hard.

Shaw was actually really great at this, relatively speaking. Willingham was 1-5. Teevens was 0-3. Harris was 1-1 but never won in the morning. Harbaugh was 2-4 and never won in the morning. Shaw ended up 7-5 and had numerous wins in the morning. [I didn't include neutral site games here and I believe Shaw went 1-2 in neutral site morning games] While Shaw's track record is an encouraging sign that things can be done to give ourselves a fighting chance, note that 7-5 in road games out east compares extremely unfavorably to his 89-49 record in all other games combined.

This is what I can't get past. We would be consigning our players to a permanent, significant physical handicap that would make it very hard to field a .500 team.

Really have to make Big 10 work. That would be worse travel than now, but so much more manageable with 4-5 other former Pac-12 teams, and generally less far east for the rest too.

Couldn't there have been factors other than time zones that contributed to the losses you pointed out.  Playing on the road whether it be 100 miles or 4,000 miles puts a team at a disadvantage.  To convince me time zones are one of the biggest factors in determining wins or losses, I would have to see far more data points presented in an objective manner.

2016 vs UNC, 2017 vs TCU, 2018 vs Pitt were all bowl games in Texas where the team spent several days in the time zone. I would exclude those from any analysis of effects of travel given the opponents also had to travel to a neutral site (TCU somewhat less neutral)

[Jamesy]

Sadly I think it's wishful thinking to suggest that the travel issues can be substantially managed. We can try to mitigate them but it's unavoidable that it would be a massive additive cost to the athletic department and that it would be perennial, structural physical handicap for the athletes.

The body clock is the body clock. Human bodies and when in the day they're most ready to play football aren't things we can cheat. Something our great, good, mediocre, and bad coaches have in common is that they suck playing east. Let's go to the tape (times listed all Pacific):

1995 East Carolina (9am) - loss

1996 Wisconsin (9:30am) - loss

1996 Michigan State (11am) - win

1998 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

1999 Texas (9am) - loss

2000 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2002 Boston College (12:30pm) - loss

2002 Notre Dame (10:30am) - loss

2004 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2005 Navy (3pm) - eeked out a lethargic win, thank goodness it was so luckily late in the day

2006 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2008 TCU (10am) - loss

2008 Notre Dame (11:30am) - loss

2009 Wake Forest (9am) - loss

2009 Oklahoma (11am) - loss

2010 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - win, and note that this is a somewhat later start time than previously in South Bend

2010 Virginia Tech (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others

2011 Duke (12:30pm) - win, and note that it's at least afternoon

2012 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2013 Army (9am) - win, albeit lethargic against an insanely outgunned service academy

2014 Notre Dame (12:30pm) - loss

2015 Northwestern (9am) - loss

2016 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - win, and note the MUCH later start time than any other previous game in South Bend

2016 North Carolina (11am) - win, albeit lethargic

2017 TCU (6pm) - loss

2018 Notre Dame (4:30pm) - loss

2018 Pitt (11am) - win

2019 UCF (12:30pm) - loss

2021 Vanderbilt (5pm) - win, and note that this is a MUCH later start time than the others and against a terrible team

2022 Notre Dame (4:30pm)- win, and note the MUCH later start time than losses in South Bend

And that's to say nothing of football and basketball struggling even in Utah and Colorado.

It is what it is. I'm not saying this to criticize our administration. They didn't create time zones. Sometimes you have to play east, and in our current situation we may have to affiliate with a conference that will require a lot of travel east. As somebody who lives back east I love the chance to go to these games. I went to 13 of these in a row. It's good for the players, fans, and recruiting to not cloister ourselves in Palo Alto. But reality is reality. These games are extremely hard.

Shaw was actually really great at this, relatively speaking. Willingham was 1-5. Teevens was 0-3. Harris was 1-1 but never won in the morning. Harbaugh was 2-4 and never won in the morning. Shaw ended up 7-5 and had numerous wins in the morning. [I didn't include neutral site games here and I believe Shaw went 1-2 in neutral site morning games] While Shaw's track record is an encouraging sign that things can be done to give ourselves a fighting chance, note that 7-5 in road games out east compares extremely unfavorably to his 89-49 record in all other games combined.

This is what I can't get past. We would be consigning our players to a permanent, significant physical handicap that would make it very hard to field a .500 team.

Really have to make Big 10 work. That would be worse travel than now, but so much more manageable with 4-5 other former Pac-12 teams, and generally less far east for the rest too.

Couldn't there have been factors other than time zones that contributed to the losses you pointed out.  Playing on the road whether it be 100 miles or 4,000 miles puts a team at a disadvantage.  To convince me time zones are one of the biggest factors in determining wins or losses, I would have to see far more data points presented in an objective manner.

2016 vs UNC, 2017 vs TCU, 2018 vs Pitt were all bowl games in Texas where the team spent several days in the time zone. I would exclude those from any analysis of effects of travel given the opponents also had to travel to a neutral site (TCU somewhat less neutral)

[Softball Fan]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/LarryWilliamsTI/status/1689376957228527616?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1689376957228527616%7Ctwgr%5E86eaf53cb00eae00773bfbe989dcd3028e3f4604%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.si.com%2Fcollege%2Fgeorgiatech%2Ffootball%2Fconference-realignment-notre-dame-pushing-hard-for-acc-to-add-cal-and-stanford[/tweet]

[Softball Fan]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/LarryWilliamsTI/status/1689376957228527616?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1689376957228527616%7Ctwgr%5E86eaf53cb00eae00773bfbe989dcd3028e3f4604%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.si.com%2Fcollege%2Fgeorgiatech%2Ffootball%2Fconference-realignment-notre-dame-pushing-hard-for-acc-to-add-cal-and-stanford[/tweet]