I told all you Cal ninnys that the B1G was not interested in Cal or Stanford. It appears I was right. They are taking Oregon and Washington apparently.....
Meaning yes, I know better than the bumbling journalists who post these crazy stories about Cal making Cal fans think the B1G wanted their idiot team.
So what’s the best case if we don’t get into the BIG10 and everyone else leaves. Do we go independent and sell ourselves to the highest bidder for non-conference away games like the 1-AA does. Say we generate 500k a game (3 million total). Then the regents Force UCLA to give us 10M/yr for the next 5 years. Then best case we sell our home game rights for what, say 4-5Million/yr. That would get us in the 17-18 Million range. Is that enough to build a competitive program and build our Brand for a few years. This is just me spitballing.
The conversation is “centered around oregon and Washington” because Cal and LJSJU were vetted even before fUCLa and Suc.
The problem is it’s a literal death sentence for the pac if they take us, while if they take oregon and udubb we’d be struggling but alive.
Why do I say that?
Well A it would be no California presence other than potentially sdsu and more importantly B
Look no further than oregon and Washington’s 2 deeps and you’ll have your answer. Oregon has 0 Oregonians on the entire 2 deep and their best player on offense is from Palo Alto while their best player on d is from Elk Grove. I count no less than 10 from the bay in the 2 deep. Also who was the last talent that truly panned out from either of those states? Exactly.
Last year alone the Bay Area (150 mile radius) had 5 starting nfl qbs (Brady, Allen, Goff, Rodgers, Carr); 2 starting rbs (Najee Harris, Joe mixon); Davante Adams; bahktiari; etc
And that’s not a 1 off either.
The talent is superior and their decade after decade after decade.
So…if cal and furd are in the big ten and oregon and udubb are not. That is a death sentence for them. If they are in the big ten and we are not it’s a huge fucking risk because we could potentially go to the big 12 or the acc and their recruiting base is poof poof gone.
Imho they will try to follow us wherever we go. They can’t compete with suc and fUCLA for la anymore and so they tap on the bay and sac hard. Take it away and their collective 40 national championships (none other than udubb 1990 in a major men’s sport) becomes that much more glaring.
The Bay Area kids can still go to UW or UO regardless of what conference they play in or we play in. Harris and Mixon went to conferences that don't have Cal or Stanford in.
I understand what you’re saying but in a way you just proved my point for me.
Those are 2 5 star skill position guys who left for pedigree schools. Not oregon. The guys oregon gets are 4 stars and a ton of them to fill a ton of positions. If they lose the Bay Area I can guarantee they lose their grip by at least 50% which may not sound like a lot but when you now only get 5 Bay Area 3-4 star guys on your class sheet who are you replacing them with?
1 star oregon kids?
They would absolutely take a hit.
It goes from the backyard to a backyard where everyone else is now dipping their stick to perhaps even a fenced off backyard with a 150 pound Rottweiler if cal and furd went to another p5. And that’s a fallacy. You somehow are implying that if oregon and udubb leave cal and furd will fade into oblivion
So the type of players that Oregon and Washington are currently getting from Bay Area. Are they not going to Oregon or Washington just because they are not in the same conference as Cal or Stanford anymore? And if they don't go to Oregon or Washington, where are they going to go? And your point is that Oregon and Washington will not leave Pac12 unless Cal and Stanford go with them?
I think he means they will have a diminished recruiting presence/exposure in the Bay Area if they don't regularly play Cal and Stanford, which I think is fallacy.. If anything they'll get these kids more easily (in addition to USC/UCLA). The B1G'S west coast pod might as well be named The Bay Area Carpetbaggers.
It’s exactly what I mean. And you’re basically assuming that if Cal and Furd are fading into the MWC or something, and if by some miracle the SEC and Big 12 don’t up their Bay Area recruiting game i feel safe saying that the average 17 year old boy does not have a raging boner to take no less than 6 East coast trips per year and basically sacrifice the entirety of their college years to being on an airplane.
For you and me?
Sure I’m an Alaska 100K gold mvp and I fly another 10k a year in my sr20 on business and that’s the norm.
An 18 year old? Not so much
The majority of them want to go to frat row and smash mystery trim, not be like me where you’re catching a red eye to hit Chicagoland for a meeting.
I’m not saying some won’t do it, but believe it or not not every 3-4 star kid is going to college solely for football.
Has Cal and Furd been vetted? Where does Cal and furd go if there's no more Pac-12 or B1G invite? From Brent McMurphy:
Friendly reminder: Big Ten “cleared & vetted” Oregon & Washington as B1G members if it makes financial sense, @ActionNetworkHQ reported last year. Last August, Oregon & B1G met in Chicago, UW & B1G met in New York. They are set to go - if B1G & network partners figure out money
I understand the frustration with the recent on the field and court success, but the fair weather fandom in recent years could really bite us in the butt.
Not a fan of this, but I hate the alternatives even more. I guess that comes from being old. Could lead to some nice trash talking with my nephew who went to and is a big Iowa fan.
“Sources” in ESPN article on this topic say discussion are centered on UW and Oregon, not Cal and Stanford. However this goes, I think we are going to see budget pressure to cut non-revenue sports?
Bring in all the traditional PAC schools to the Big 10 , tell AZ, ASU and Utah to pound sand, create east and west divisions in the new superconference, and play the championship game in Pasadena on Jan 1.
I actually like Utah the most out of the expansions. UA/ASU were fine, but never felt like they truly belonged. CU was a mistake. Utah, as much as they're opposites of the rest of us, seemed to embrace the Pac more and really thrived with us.
The B1G don't want Cal. Cal can keep fooling themselves. UCLA shouldn't have to pay Cal anything either. The B1G is only interested in Oregon, Washington and maybe Utah. No other Pac 12 team brings anything to the B1G.
Apparently this "Married Christian Ohio State Buckeyes fan" knows more about the thinking of B1G leadership than the Athletic journalist that published the linked article
Not sure if you guys know this or not, but the B1G ten fans are mostly arrogant a$$holes. Used to kind of pull for the Wolverines (for being a Calish kind of public school) until I interacted with their fans. Not even a decade of humble pie helped. And the Scarlet Tampons^^^ are even worse (and a lot dumber too).
Basically all the Pac schools suck monkey balls except USC & UCLA. I d g a shat what pac fans think. The journalist who wrote that article don't know squat. The B1G may want 2 more Pac teams, not Cal though, trust me, Cal blows big chunks....The B1G wants some ACC teams and Notre Dame more than any of the PAC teams left. The ones I mentioned in my earlier comment are the only ones worth anything. The leftovers are destined for the Big 12 or the Mountain West. Cal, Stanford, Oregon State and Washington State all belong in the Mountain West with similar quality teams like San Jose State, Wyoming and New Mexico. As far as Michigan and Ohio State goes, either team would TOTALLY DEMOLISH MOST OF WHAT LEFT IN THE DYING PAC. CAL is the worst team in the Pac 12 with that stupid governor in California trying to butt in into something that was really none of his business as far UCLA leaving for the best conference in FBS along with the SEC. PAC is a garbage league on its way out of FBS 🏈.
I disagree with the scenario, but also disagree with you statement. We'd have a hefty revenue advantage over everyone else, which would build over time. We'd have Big 12 money in a MWC-like conference.
UCLA and USC kids will be flying to the Midwest every other week. My kid goes to a B1G school and the novelty of trips to the Midwest wears out fast. A easy flight up to the Bay Area and road trips to the PNW with a clear path the the playoff can be a major selling point to CA kids if done right.
Our games against the PNW schools have been tight (within 2 scores) lately.
OU: 3 of the last 4 years
OSU: 3 of 4
UW: 4 of 4
I don’t see how we aren’t in the discussion to win the PAC-8/10 every year.
I’m not saying I wouldn’t take the B1G money if offered but if not, we can still find ourselves in a pretty good spot.
I think the idea behind "gobbling up California recruits whose parents want to keep their games in California" is: if you go to Cal your away games are a lot closer (on the west coast + AZ + Utah) than if go to Ucla or USC (flights to the midwest every other weekend, most with a layover or 2).
The thing is, those recruits who we'll be "gobbling up" are gonna be offered NIL deals worth 6 figures more than what we can offer with our minuscule TV/Conference share revenue in the Pac 8 and their massive deal in the Big 10. The money and donor loyalty battle that we are already badly losing to the LA schools will widen even further if we don't get into the Big 10. And in the age of NIL, that is not a good thing for recruiting
TV money and NIL money are separate though, right? Schools received the TV money and explicitly cannot pay the NIL deals.
I don't disagree that we should want into the B1G. But exactly where the money goes and why it matters has always seemed a little under-explained to me.
I can't imagine why I'd be against this if I were a FAN of a B1G school. More chances to visit California and have games on TV there and adding some conference members who are unlikely to be major competitive threats (at least from their perspective)? And they add more academic prestige to the league? What's the problem?
I get why the TV networks would be less excited. But the fans? Once USC and UCLA are there, why not?
And not sure why they have the impression that UCLA is so much athletically superior than Cal and Stanford. Certainly, UCLA has a historic basketball program, but football has never consistently been at the top of the Pac. We certainly have more higher profile players in the NFL.
Don't know where you are getting your information, but the Big 10 alumni chapters in the SF area are weighing in for Cal and they aren't the only ones. The chapters count far more than some random twitter remark.
Tarnishing? We'd raise the academic standards of the Big conference in one fell swoop. Cal and Stanford are together the two greatest academic and athletic institutions in the West, all considered. I took the bait here!
I cannot stress enough how little the twitter (or X? w/e the fluff they call it now) contingent of B1G football fans replying to the expansion threads seem to care about academics.
Athletically the biggest draws are women’s sports and Olympic sports. Big10 is very behind on those vs sec (with the addition of OU UT). Revenue generating sports, not so much
I told all you Cal ninnys that the B1G was not interested in Cal or Stanford. It appears I was right. They are taking Oregon and Washington apparently.....
Meaning yes, I know better than the bumbling journalists who post these crazy stories about Cal making Cal fans think the B1G wanted their idiot team.
So what’s the best case if we don’t get into the BIG10 and everyone else leaves. Do we go independent and sell ourselves to the highest bidder for non-conference away games like the 1-AA does. Say we generate 500k a game (3 million total). Then the regents Force UCLA to give us 10M/yr for the next 5 years. Then best case we sell our home game rights for what, say 4-5Million/yr. That would get us in the 17-18 Million range. Is that enough to build a competitive program and build our Brand for a few years. This is just me spitballing.
The conversation is “centered around oregon and Washington” because Cal and LJSJU were vetted even before fUCLa and Suc.
The problem is it’s a literal death sentence for the pac if they take us, while if they take oregon and udubb we’d be struggling but alive.
Why do I say that?
Well A it would be no California presence other than potentially sdsu and more importantly B
Look no further than oregon and Washington’s 2 deeps and you’ll have your answer. Oregon has 0 Oregonians on the entire 2 deep and their best player on offense is from Palo Alto while their best player on d is from Elk Grove. I count no less than 10 from the bay in the 2 deep. Also who was the last talent that truly panned out from either of those states? Exactly.
Last year alone the Bay Area (150 mile radius) had 5 starting nfl qbs (Brady, Allen, Goff, Rodgers, Carr); 2 starting rbs (Najee Harris, Joe mixon); Davante Adams; bahktiari; etc
And that’s not a 1 off either.
The talent is superior and their decade after decade after decade.
So…if cal and furd are in the big ten and oregon and udubb are not. That is a death sentence for them. If they are in the big ten and we are not it’s a huge fucking risk because we could potentially go to the big 12 or the acc and their recruiting base is poof poof gone.
Imho they will try to follow us wherever we go. They can’t compete with suc and fUCLA for la anymore and so they tap on the bay and sac hard. Take it away and their collective 40 national championships (none other than udubb 1990 in a major men’s sport) becomes that much more glaring.
That logic doesn't make sense.
The Bay Area kids can still go to UW or UO regardless of what conference they play in or we play in. Harris and Mixon went to conferences that don't have Cal or Stanford in.
I understand what you’re saying but in a way you just proved my point for me.
Those are 2 5 star skill position guys who left for pedigree schools. Not oregon. The guys oregon gets are 4 stars and a ton of them to fill a ton of positions. If they lose the Bay Area I can guarantee they lose their grip by at least 50% which may not sound like a lot but when you now only get 5 Bay Area 3-4 star guys on your class sheet who are you replacing them with?
1 star oregon kids?
They would absolutely take a hit.
It goes from the backyard to a backyard where everyone else is now dipping their stick to perhaps even a fenced off backyard with a 150 pound Rottweiler if cal and furd went to another p5. And that’s a fallacy. You somehow are implying that if oregon and udubb leave cal and furd will fade into oblivion
So the type of players that Oregon and Washington are currently getting from Bay Area. Are they not going to Oregon or Washington just because they are not in the same conference as Cal or Stanford anymore? And if they don't go to Oregon or Washington, where are they going to go? And your point is that Oregon and Washington will not leave Pac12 unless Cal and Stanford go with them?
I think he means they will have a diminished recruiting presence/exposure in the Bay Area if they don't regularly play Cal and Stanford, which I think is fallacy.. If anything they'll get these kids more easily (in addition to USC/UCLA). The B1G'S west coast pod might as well be named The Bay Area Carpetbaggers.
It’s exactly what I mean. And you’re basically assuming that if Cal and Furd are fading into the MWC or something, and if by some miracle the SEC and Big 12 don’t up their Bay Area recruiting game i feel safe saying that the average 17 year old boy does not have a raging boner to take no less than 6 East coast trips per year and basically sacrifice the entirety of their college years to being on an airplane.
For you and me?
Sure I’m an Alaska 100K gold mvp and I fly another 10k a year in my sr20 on business and that’s the norm.
An 18 year old? Not so much
The majority of them want to go to frat row and smash mystery trim, not be like me where you’re catching a red eye to hit Chicagoland for a meeting.
I’m not saying some won’t do it, but believe it or not not every 3-4 star kid is going to college solely for football.
Okay I reread your original comment. Did you edit it? It looks different from what I read the first time.
Anyway, I don't think there's any chance that Big 10 takes Cal and Stanford and not Oregon and Washington, so you can forget that.
So much for that….what happens now? Mountain West?
This sucks so bad.
We went from no hope, to maybe hope, to back to no hope.
Has Cal and Furd been vetted? Where does Cal and furd go if there's no more Pac-12 or B1G invite? From Brent McMurphy:
Friendly reminder: Big Ten “cleared & vetted” Oregon & Washington as B1G members if it makes financial sense, @ActionNetworkHQ reported last year. Last August, Oregon & B1G met in Chicago, UW & B1G met in New York. They are set to go - if B1G & network partners figure out money
Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) August 3, 2023
Yeah the articles today make it sound like the UW/OU are in and we’re out. Hoping things continue to evolve.
Yep, that’s how this reads to me as well.
I understand the frustration with the recent on the field and court success, but the fair weather fandom in recent years could really bite us in the butt.
I also think the B1G has an ethical obligation to help clean up this mess, but not like ethics mean anything anymore.
Not a fan of this, but I hate the alternatives even more. I guess that comes from being old. Could lead to some nice trash talking with my nephew who went to and is a big Iowa fan.
“Sources” in ESPN article on this topic say discussion are centered on UW and Oregon, not Cal and Stanford. However this goes, I think we are going to see budget pressure to cut non-revenue sports?
TBF, ESPN has been trying to screw Cal and Stanford for years. Any coverage of them has been negative so I would take that with salt
Bring in all the traditional PAC schools to the Big 10 , tell AZ, ASU and Utah to pound sand, create east and west divisions in the new superconference, and play the championship game in Pasadena on Jan 1.
I actually like Utah the most out of the expansions. UA/ASU were fine, but never felt like they truly belonged. CU was a mistake. Utah, as much as they're opposites of the rest of us, seemed to embrace the Pac more and really thrived with us.
Come on man. Playing the Arizona schools in the old round robin was great. Lots of B students from SoCal go to Arizona.
Just merge the two leagues. Call it the Big Pac (all gay jokes aside.....)
Biggie vs Pac divisions
Please save us from ourselves
The B1G don't want Cal. Cal can keep fooling themselves. UCLA shouldn't have to pay Cal anything either. The B1G is only interested in Oregon, Washington and maybe Utah. No other Pac 12 team brings anything to the B1G.
Apparently this "Married Christian Ohio State Buckeyes fan" knows more about the thinking of B1G leadership than the Athletic journalist that published the linked article
Not sure if you guys know this or not, but the B1G ten fans are mostly arrogant a$$holes. Used to kind of pull for the Wolverines (for being a Calish kind of public school) until I interacted with their fans. Not even a decade of humble pie helped. And the Scarlet Tampons^^^ are even worse (and a lot dumber too).
Basically all the Pac schools suck monkey balls except USC & UCLA. I d g a shat what pac fans think. The journalist who wrote that article don't know squat. The B1G may want 2 more Pac teams, not Cal though, trust me, Cal blows big chunks....The B1G wants some ACC teams and Notre Dame more than any of the PAC teams left. The ones I mentioned in my earlier comment are the only ones worth anything. The leftovers are destined for the Big 12 or the Mountain West. Cal, Stanford, Oregon State and Washington State all belong in the Mountain West with similar quality teams like San Jose State, Wyoming and New Mexico. As far as Michigan and Ohio State goes, either team would TOTALLY DEMOLISH MOST OF WHAT LEFT IN THE DYING PAC. CAL is the worst team in the Pac 12 with that stupid governor in California trying to butt in into something that was really none of his business as far UCLA leaving for the best conference in FBS along with the SEC. PAC is a garbage league on its way out of FBS 🏈.
Reminds me of National Geographic:
"Here we see the native Ohio State fan, roaming in the wild."
Don't get too close people, they bite with the five or six teeth they have left.
Man you really spend your life doing this? Your wife must be miserable.
You're a "fan" and your writing clearly indicates that you didn't attend/graduate OSU. Also, one would certainly not have made such an ignoramus rant.
Probably a t-shirt fan.
Oh, I'm sorry if my comments were not of a Christian attitude. Lol....GOD BLESS the B1G.
Gonna pray for your teeth and A1C.
Of course they are. If there was an odd team out, it would be Stanford. But the Media market here is too good to pass up.
Listened to Dan Wetzel's podcast. He make a compelling case to keep the PAC small.
He didn't get into Cal's situation but using his logic:
- Keep the PAC to 8 to 10 for the next 5ish years.
- Spend the next 5 years gobbling up California recruits whose parents want to keep their games in California
- Win the watered-down league (right now, the only major hurdles are Oregon & Utah)
- Ride the PAC's automatic bid to the college football playoff
- Build brand value (and revenue) thru winning a watered-own league while collecting payments from UCLA
- Bask in the glory (and revenue) as in the Tedford years
Thoughts? Any chance staying together as a small conference could be better for Cal?
You make a compelling case not to listen to Dan Wetzel's podcast. :)
We are gonna get killed in the Pac 8, so might as well get killed in Big 10.
Yeah…. Ucla and USC are still in California last I checked which will make it tough to get California recruits.
Oregon, UDub, and Oregons St are miles ahead of Cal football wise right now.
This seems like a sure fire way to finish 3rd in a watered down conference in order to be banished to the Big West.
I disagree with the scenario, but also disagree with you statement. We'd have a hefty revenue advantage over everyone else, which would build over time. We'd have Big 12 money in a MWC-like conference.
UCLA and USC kids will be flying to the Midwest every other week. My kid goes to a B1G school and the novelty of trips to the Midwest wears out fast. A easy flight up to the Bay Area and road trips to the PNW with a clear path the the playoff can be a major selling point to CA kids if done right.
Our games against the PNW schools have been tight (within 2 scores) lately.
OU: 3 of the last 4 years
OSU: 3 of 4
UW: 4 of 4
I don’t see how we aren’t in the discussion to win the PAC-8/10 every year.
I’m not saying I wouldn’t take the B1G money if offered but if not, we can still find ourselves in a pretty good spot.
Will UO and UW be around though?
Apparently, the answer is no.
I think the idea behind "gobbling up California recruits whose parents want to keep their games in California" is: if you go to Cal your away games are a lot closer (on the west coast + AZ + Utah) than if go to Ucla or USC (flights to the midwest every other weekend, most with a layover or 2).
The thing is, those recruits who we'll be "gobbling up" are gonna be offered NIL deals worth 6 figures more than what we can offer with our minuscule TV/Conference share revenue in the Pac 8 and their massive deal in the Big 10. The money and donor loyalty battle that we are already badly losing to the LA schools will widen even further if we don't get into the Big 10. And in the age of NIL, that is not a good thing for recruiting
TV money and NIL money are separate though, right? Schools received the TV money and explicitly cannot pay the NIL deals.
I don't disagree that we should want into the B1G. But exactly where the money goes and why it matters has always seemed a little under-explained to me.
Big 10 West: the Pacific schools, Iowa, Nebraska, Wisconsin, and Northwestern or maybe Illinois.
Minnesota, not an Illinois school.
Big 10 fans on Twitter are losing their minds at the thought of Cal and Furd tarnishing their conference... How myopic
I can't imagine why I'd be against this if I were a FAN of a B1G school. More chances to visit California and have games on TV there and adding some conference members who are unlikely to be major competitive threats (at least from their perspective)? And they add more academic prestige to the league? What's the problem?
I get why the TV networks would be less excited. But the fans? Once USC and UCLA are there, why not?
Some fans seem to be butthurt at the prospect of their favorite team getting less money.
But honestly, the most common POV I'm seeing is just shitting on Cal and Furd's football prowess.
I don't even think they'd be getting less money. Any arrangement to bring in new schools would have to keep the existing ones whole.
And not sure why they have the impression that UCLA is so much athletically superior than Cal and Stanford. Certainly, UCLA has a historic basketball program, but football has never consistently been at the top of the Pac. We certainly have more higher profile players in the NFL.
As you can see from that OSU dude, they only think about football and nothing else
Ignorance, probably.
They are afraid of what will happen if some athletes actually graduate. The increase in average GPA can be very frightening.
Don't know where you are getting your information, but the Big 10 alumni chapters in the SF area are weighing in for Cal and they aren't the only ones. The chapters count far more than some random twitter remark.
He's looking at Reddit. r/cfb is basically a bunch of people who think football wins are the only metric of athletic success and thus don't want Cal.
Tarnishing? We'd raise the academic standards of the Big conference in one fell swoop. Cal and Stanford are together the two greatest academic and athletic institutions in the West, all considered. I took the bait here!
I cannot stress enough how little the twitter (or X? w/e the fluff they call it now) contingent of B1G football fans replying to the expansion threads seem to care about academics.
Athletically the biggest draws are women’s sports and Olympic sports. Big10 is very behind on those vs sec (with the addition of OU UT). Revenue generating sports, not so much