31 Comments

Wo! I feel good, I knew that I would, now

I feel good, I knew that I would, now

So good, so good, I got you

Wo! I feel nice, like sugar and spice

I feel nice, like sugar and spice

So nice, so nice, I got you

Wo! I feel good, I knew that I would, now

I feel good, I knew that I would

So good, so good, 'cause I got you

So good, so good, 'cause I got you

So good, so good, 'cause I got you

Go Bears!

PS now I just need to fix the sleeping disorder

Expand full comment

LOVE ALL OF YOU!

AND GO! EFFING! BEARS!!!!!!

Expand full comment

PETE THAMEL:

Our @ESPN story on the ACC voting this morning to invite Cal, Stanford and SMU, per ESPN sources. Commissioner Jim Phillips lands the plane on a move for the ACC that pushes it to 18 programs and drives hundreds of millions in revenue to the league.

Expand full comment

CONFIRMED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Expand full comment

WE"RE IN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"THE BEARS! THE BEARS HAVE WON!"

Expand full comment

I have nothing clever or productive to add, other than…GO FUCKING BEARS!!!!

Expand full comment

BearGreg seems quite confident that it's happening. We shall see!

https://bearinsider.com/forums/2/topics/116216

Expand full comment

And the latest from the UNC trustees now has him less confident. Yikes!

https://bearinsider.com/forums/2/topics/116221

Expand full comment

UNC has always been a firm NO. Not sure how this is news.

NC State was always the one you had to flip.

Expand full comment

I think it's posturing. Because he said expansion wouldn't be best right now, is basically trying to make his wishes known. Either that, or NC State changed their vote

Expand full comment

why would he publicly say this?

The optimist in me says that it's face-saving - he knows expansion will happen, and he's putting this out in advance to say "hey it wasnt me", to placate those (like women's soccer coach) who are against it.

The pessimist says he's doing it to make it easier for NC St to vote no.

I guess we'll find out tomorrow.

Expand full comment

Yeah, it’s weird to put this out now. Like, wouldn’t you have discussed this with the Chancellor during the many weeks that this has been a pressing decision? It does feel like they think the vote is going against them and are tossing a Hail Mary to try derailing it.

Expand full comment

"Only a miracle can save the Bears..."

- Joe Starkey, November 20, 1982

Expand full comment

OK, while we're killing time, I'm gonna float something here at the expense or potentially coming across as a dolt. My degree isn't in Econ, Accounting , or Marketing, let alone an MBA, but here goes anyway. --- If expansion leads to a grab of more market share, then I assume it is fair to say 'the bigger the better"? Given that there are only so many schools whose teams have a cachet of winning or some other strong, compelling positive, quality attribute, then the conference that has the most schools with the most "winning / positive / quality" recognition has the most value and therefore the most resultant income. If the SEC, BIG, and Big 12 are done expanding for now, shouldn't the ACC (soon to be C2C), try and snag and "lock in" as many schools as possible "with the right competitive, eyeballs drawing stuff" right now before the three titanic conferences rev up their expansion engines again. Therefore, shouldn't the ACC (C2C) poach and padlock more schools right now and become a larger, less regional, more national conference? Cal, Stanford, SMU, SD St., Ore St., Wash St., Tulane, Rice, Tulsa, Navy, UConn, and others that make sense. I know there is the "at what cost aspect", and the rules, regs, and controls aspects, and the "too much too soon" avoidance aspect, but there should be enough of a common sense of the basics to make educated decisions now. The full, logical culling can take place later. Control the schools means control of the conferences and control of the game. Never again would the ACC be known as the 1 in the Big 3 +1. To the bold go the spoils.

Expand full comment

There is a good article in the News Observer (Raleigh, NC) that describes all the reasons the ACC should not add the three schools. It ends by stating adding the three school is the best bad decision the ACC could make. Search for it on the web and you’ll have a better idea of how others view the value of adding Cal and Stanford. Unfortunately the recent performances of the football and basketball teams don’t impress the folks in NC.

Expand full comment

Nor should they. Knowlton and Christ enabled incompetence from the revenue sports at a time in college sports when it needed to be front and center. In so doing, they quite possibly destroyed the entire department.

Expand full comment

hard to deny - the administration tolerated inferior athletic team results, did little or nothing to turn around things (like firing incompetent coaches), and treated athletics like PE class - Cal's only good results came in sports where the coaches refused to accept subpar, indifferent performances and coached and willed the teams to excellence - rugby, crew, swimming, water polo, and a few others

Expand full comment

ACC. Power. Move.

Expand full comment

Let the second guessing commence!

Expand full comment

You'd have to pay a pretty penny in The City to get teased like this.

Expand full comment

"As the Campanile Turns"

Expand full comment

"...it tolls for thee."

Expand full comment

can someone please share the Zoom info? I'd like to listen in.

Expand full comment

UN: jknowlton

PW: cretin1868

Expand full comment

"ACC presidents agree to speedy ent moot.

Treebeard promises hasty conclusion sometime this decade."

Expand full comment

Good outcome: We're voted in

Bad outcome: We're not voted in

Worst outcome: ANOTHER GOD FORSAKEN MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR THE FUTURE TBD

Expand full comment

Even worst outcome: We're voted in at $5 bucks per year

Expand full comment

yes but this would be the dream outcome for SMU

Expand full comment