Cal - I am invincible and you have made me this way.
I am the third generation of my family to be Bears fans. Nearly half a century ago, I sat in traffic and had terrible parking only to sit in nosebleeds to watch us lose to San Jose State. I've furiously dialed on the phone to try to get classes on Tele*Bears only to get shut out. I've been hassled by the local colorful characters every time I visit Berkeley's well-textured roads and sidewalks.
Year after year, I hope for the best and am crushed by sub-par performance on the field, court, [not you, Cal watersports], and track. Over and over, you find ways to ensure that I am exposed to challenges that force me to adapt and endure.
And yet, I will not quit. I will not die. I have followed you across the country from Texas, Mississippi, North Carolina, Indiana and other places afar. As I watch my own body whither and lose its once okay-ish power, I will watch us atrophy as struggle to be competitive against once previously deemed lesser teams. But I will persevere. I will learn to love the rivalry of playing against new teams and traveling to new towns that I would have never been scheduled had Cal stayed in a Power 5 conference.
I have to admit - I didn't see this coming and it is diabolically clever attack. But, you have taught me how to smile and have a good time as I roll with your punches.
Man. Don't know how much longer I can follow this madness. It is making me depressed (seriously). What a tragedy. I love Cal sports and the Pac so much. It's like the death of a loved one.
This shit is FAR from over. Expecting numerous twists and turns still. And soon reaching that point where I want to tune out for a while and come back when the dust settles.
“ Board meetings are happening with the university regents at nearly every one of the above five institutions in the coming hours and days.”
And yet cricket chirps from Christ and Knowlton. I can understand keeping your cards close to your vest, but this smacks of sleepwalking off of a cliff’s edge.
I’m going to play devils advocate here and argue why it’s a better bet to stay in the pac 12. As I mentioned before it’s a recruiting risk for udubb and uo to leave us for the big 10. Not saying it will happen but it’s definitely a risk if they leave us.
You put a team of oregon kids up against a team from other states and they’re finishing just ahead of Alaska, and the Dakota states and just behind Wyoming and Montana.
Look. Not trying to win you over, but a year ago it was rumored Apple was buying espn in 2024. 6 months ago espn was announcing they’re going full stream by 2025. A week ago espn was bootlicking at Apple for a streaming deal with Apple to which espn got crickets.
I believe wholeheartedly espn is being bought by Apple and I also believe that there will be an axe to grind (pun intended) with York mark and the rest of the b12 clowns.
If you look at the actual specifics of what Apple is wanting to bring to the market you see that streaming can generate twice the revenue from the same number of viewers due to cpm impressions billing which also happens to be 1000x more appealing to advertisers.
They make slightly less in sub fees but massively more in ad revenue. And they offer the product at less than half the cost. Remember when Deloreans were being marketed at 5 times the going rate of a mustang? I do. How’d that work out?
Remember when Costco offered gas at 75% of the guy down the street?
Markets always find the better value and it’s only a matter of time.
You have the most valuable company in the world and the biggest company in the world at that outside of China construction bank offering a product that is .5 of the competitors. You also have all the current market players kissing ass of said company to get in. Yet here we are again.
Fiat APATHY!
I personally like the Apple play and since none of us have seen the payout how can we criticize it.
And I would love to see Yormark and co come crying for aid to the richest company in the world which was founded by a cal alum and run by numerous cal alums begging for a lifeline. That would tickle me after all of the tampering this jackass and his team of cfb trolls have done.
The Apple option only has a chance at working if the conference doesn't collapse. Each team leaving cuts the subscriptions. Arizona seems to be a done deal so the dominos are likely to just tumble.
I agree. However I also haven’t seen the deal and neither has anyone else. People close to Apple had hinted the deal was better than 20 by about 10 mil then everyone went silent except the big 12 provocateurs. Saying “it’s 20 mil” then today “oh our bad it’s actually low 20s” now “oh the sub bonuses are worth above 50 if everyone who currently watches p12 subs”
Personally I think it’s 29.17 million per year with a sub bonus of 1.5 per per month ;)
This is why Haas and furd are top tier business schools and Arizona and b12 are not. If this was poker I would be loving it. Risk aversion is never successful.
I've seen that Apple is really trying to make it happen, even trying to pull a linear partner in to sweeten things and bump up the price. If we get up around 30 then I think the Pac can hold. The broadcasters just aren't looking to overpay like they did a few years ago so it's tough.
You're right, that the deal hasn't been released. But the relevant schools certainly aren't acting like it's competitive. Maybe it's like a prisoner's dilemma where the PAC would be in the best position by holding together. Unfortunately, it looks like a critical mass is jumping.
Also remember that schools are huge bureaucracies with a lot of fixed costs. Apple is (as reported) kinda acting like a tech company and huge public institutions just can't deal with uncertainty.
My wife attended Mills College, and it's collapse has been horrific for her. Now I know better how she feels. The thought of Cal not having all the Olympic sports, and being such a paragon of scholar athleticism, would cut me off at the knees. I know nothing is done yet,. but I'm still mourning the loss of the LA schools. This is just too much for my passionate Cal fandom to handle without agony. Go Bears now. Go Bears in the past. Go Bears forever goddamn it!
Here is my $0.02 on this whole situation, and why the Pac-12 missed the big picture.
Conference re-alignment and media deals are in essence, the transfer portal and NIL for teams. The college football landscape has changed radically over the past five years and the Pac-12 and its’s member institutional leaders (presidents, AD’s and even mega-donors) have been asleep at the switch.
The conference has been operating under the (faulty) assumption that these changes and disruptions are relatively minor and can be managed, rather than the game changers that they are. We can lament the dramatic diminishing importance of conference loyalty, local rivalries, history, and tradition but these things are relics of bygone days or at best, secondary factors to what counts today – which is nothing more than money or media.
To that effect, here is my take on the “vulturing” of Pac 12 teams.
USC and UCLA are attractive for obvious reasons. USC is a football blue blood and UCLA is a basketball blue blood. In the current era, this means:
• USC football can and should be expected to compete for CFP and major bowl spots every year – this provides high revenue potential (payback for a media deal) on a reliable basis
• UCLA offers similar potential in the basketball area, reliable NCAA tourney team with realistic Final Four aspirations in more years than not.
• Neither are slouches in their secondary sports and the greater LA media market is a plus but not the major driving factor
Washington and Oregon offer similar, albeit slightly less compelling packages than USC and UCLA – this is why the LA schools were “scavenged” first.
• Both of these schools have solid football programs and have shown the ability to compete for major bowls and have made appearances in the CFP.
• Importantly, these schools have shown that mediocrity (let alone the dismal performance that has plagued Cal in the recent past) will not be tolerated. Their down periods are brief and it is understood that performance at a high level is the year-in and year-out expectation.
• This translates to an expectation (in dollars and cents) that these teams will be competing for major dollars bowls and CFP appearances
Arizona comes next – why, because they are (along with Gonzaga and UCLA) one of the few basketball blue bloods and can offer any conference and their bean counters a reliable NCAA tourney participant and a Final Four aspirant (which translates to ratings and $$$) in more years than not. It is that simple
Utah is interesting is they are up and coming, particularly in football. Oregon St. is where Utah was 5-7 years ago but has the disadvantage of little history and a small market.
Cal and Stanford, sadly, have abysmal recent history and the other conference chieftains (Big 10, Big 12, ACC) looking at the bottom line don’t see much of anything worth pursuing.
• Stanford, 10 years ago in the days of Andrew Luck, Christian McCaffrey, Tight End U, and Toby Gerhardt, would have made for a compelling conversation. Stanford basketball was prominent and attractive 5-10 years before that. Unfortunately in the days of media and dollars, “what have you done for me lately” is all that matters
• Cal’s story is worse. Nothing noteworthy to speak of on the football front since Tedford and this board has rightly proclaimed that we have had one of, if not, the worst 3 year spell in basketball of any major program. Sadly, this is our brand and baggage right now. Hopefully Madsen can change things up but I fear it might be too late.
What does all this mean. For all of the pomp and prestige that major academic institutions like Cal and Stanford have, we (and the conference at large) have misread a major dislocation and the impacts of this will be far reaching and while perhaps not permanent, are likely to be generational.
I wouldn't quite say NOTHING noteworthy for Cal since the Tedford days since we did produce a #1 QB pick in Jared Goff. But yeah, we are in the worst possible position at the worst possible time.
This is mostly spot on. Only quibbles are that football matters far more/brings in far more viewers/money than basketball. And market size matters. The LA market really boosts USC.
USC is worth about double the B10 median, UO is slightly above the B10 median (because people in OR really care about the Ducks and Uncle Phil has made them cool to the youngs), and UW and UCLA are slightly below. Right now, nobody else in the Pac12 is close to those 4 in value but a booming population and local passion for college football means Utah will be worth what UW and UCLA are now by 2040.
UCLA lucked out and was just riding USC's coattails.
A huge problem Cal and Stanford have is that non-alums in the Bay Area just don't seem to care all that much about Cal or Stanford football (unlike non-alums in OR and UT), so the Bay Area market isn't as valuable as its population size would indicate it should be.
And yeah, many Pac teams outside of the LA schools should have prepared for this scenario dealcades ago.
As a Bay Area Michigan alum, I REALLY hope the B1G finds a way to get Cal and Stanford into the conference. And that's not just for selfish reasons in getting to attend Michigan games without having to travel across multiple times zones; it's because of how much we have in common with UC-Berkeley as a university. Hell, we even share the same colors.
Having said that, I wouldn't lose hope yet, Cal fans. Cal and Stanford would be great additions for their academic prestige alone. I know the B1G university presidents are salivating at the thought of adding academic powerhouses like Cal and Stanford alongside schools like Michigan, Northwestern, Wisconsin, Illinois, and Purdue. And the Big XII is not a good fit for Cal and Stanford for that very reason. If they're willing to accept a lower revenue share than UCLA, USC, Oregon, Washington, and the existing members (which would still be significantly more than what they're getting from the Pac-??, with greater potential for growth due to the wider TV exposure), then there's no reason why a deal can't be worked out. The B1G would likely also want Cal to present a concrete plan for how it plans to alleviate its heavy debt load without needing subsidies from the B1G.
I know this is an unpopular opinion here, but I think the mix of elitism and outright bigotry towards BYU likely contributed to this. We could’ve added them years ago, with all the impacts of that brand. We refused because of their religious leaning. How many other opportunities did our university veto with Stanford?
1000% this. An unbelievably moronic business decision (followed by more elitist, moronic decisions) I’ve bitched about for years. But hey, at least we took that stand; look where it’s helped get us!
Maybe it's because I'm not an alum, but I have never understood this. Why would anyone care if fan culture doesn't mix? Football is football. It's the same sport whether or not you're culture's mix or clash. Why would that even be an issue?
It's amusing how "lack of success/interest" is why Cal and Furd are being given the cold shoulder, while Maryland/Rutgers/UCLA have a similar lack of results and fan support as the Bay Area schools. UC Los Angeles was lucky enough to get an invite thanks to their brother from another mother I suppose. Oh well, as long as they are firing the cannon and we have the Big Game to look forward to I will be there. B1G, XII, etc won't get a second of my time however. If they don't want my beloved Golden Bears, they won't get me. Enjoy $1 off your next media deal courtesy of yours truly. Roll on you Bears!
I think there's still a ticket to B1G coming. The school presidents want us in their consortium, Fox (and other networks) don't want to pay to make that happen. Athletics only represents a piece of the total financial pie (Big Ten Academic Alliance already does over $11B in research/year). Remember, schools usually subsidize athletic departments.
I think the issue is more about who pays for what. There are lots of things that can be done to offset costs to networks like smaller share sizes and loans from the conference (like Rutgers got), plus some potential UCLA payments.
Rutgers and Maryland just happened to be in the right place, at the right time.
I can’t believe Cal and Rutgers played a meaningless makeup game due to 9/11 in late fall 2001 to avoid a winless season and 22 years later Cal might be left behind while Rutgers is in the Big10.
Rutgers brings NYC/NJ which is the #1 media market in the US.
Maryland brings the DC, Baltimore, Northern Virginia markets.
The problem with so many on this thread is you fail to see what has been going on in front of you for several decades: the media rights landscape has been shifting and the Big Ten (and others) have spent the last 20 odd years positioning themselves for that new environment. Meanwhile the Pac 12 schools have been sitting arrogantly on the sidelines. I say arrogantly because several years back the Big Ten reached out to the Pac Ten with an offer of a full merger between the two conferences. The Pac 12 turned the Big Ten down flatly and even left some locker room bulletin board quotes about many Pac 12 members couldn't envision themselves in the same conference as Iowa State (we laughed...Iowa State isn't in the Big Ten). But make no mistake about it, the message was received.
Since then the Big Ten has continued to expand strategically to the point it now includes the #1, 2, 3 and 4 media markets with multiple mid-size markets as well.
So, you can all go on about "Rutgers and Maryland" getting lucky, or you can start thinking about how you're going to clean up the mess you've all set yourselves up for.
You truly live up to your name. I don’t recall any such merger between the Pac12 and Big10 potentially merging and the Pac12 saying no. If true, please post a link to your claim.
I am not in charge so I didn’t make this mess, therefore it isn’t mine to clean up.
You’re right the TV landscape is changing, the traditional cable subscription model is dying and the Big10 was able to get a good deal with Fox/ESPN by including Rutgers and Maryland when the cable model was still doing well. Rutgers and Maryland were lucky, Rutgers sucks as a program and has no real fan base. Maryland is a little better. Nothing those schools did earned them a right to the Big10, even the Big10 and those schools knew they were lucky or else they wouldn’t have came in at a smaller share/payout when they first entered the Big10.
The link below references a meeting back in August of 2021 between the Big Ten, Pac 12 and ACC which was in response to the SEC poaching Texas and Oklahoma from the Big 12.
Of note, the ACC's commissioner, Jim Phillips had just left Northwestern to become the ACC commissioner and Kevin Warren had just joined the Big Ten as its commissioner. Being new in their roles and having the ability to read the tea leaves on the wall, they were both ready to make something happen that was bigger than a vague press release about an alliance.
You'll notice that the outcome from this meeting was nothing but a lot of vague puffery about "partnerships" and "alliances" and "stability". But make no mistake about it...these gentlemen, along with all the other assembled dignitaries did NOT get together to discuss vague alliances. You could handle that level of strategic thinking with an email that cc'd everyone's PR team.
The Pac 12 contingent was road block to any further discussions of either a merger or any form of true "alliance".
Flash forward a year from the "alliance" meeting and the Big Ten which already held access to the #1, #3, #4 media markets (plus numerous other top 25 markets) only needs the #2 media market in order to compete with the SEC. USC and UCLA both come to realize they can't get the > $50 million annual revenue deal from within a conference that not only has the #2 media market but plays most of it's games set off on a geographic island hidden behind a 2-3 hour time zone difference from the population base you NEED if you're going to justify $50 million a year. So, you get last summer's news that USC and UCLA are leaving for the Big Ten.
The problem is that, unlike Maryland and Rutgers, Cal and Stanford don't have the TV market to make up for their lack of competitiveness on the field. The combined populations of NYC/NJ and the DMV dwarf the population of Northern California by many, many millions. The East Coast has tons of B1G alumni (in fact, the B1G more well-represented on the East Coast in terms of alumni than many East Coast schools of similar size). That's a big part of the reason why the conference added Rutgers and Maryland; it wasn't so much for the value of those schools, it was more to take advantage of the B1G's enormous alumni base in NY/NJ and the DMV. In Northern California, Michigan and maybe Illinois and Purdue are the only current B1G schools that have anything resembling a large alumni presence.
Ah yes, I remember. I was at that game, now that you mention it (2012, I think). That is the one and only time I have worn the gear of a school other than Michigan to a football game. The fact that your colors are so similar to ours made it palatable. 😀
I think 2012 is correct, without checking... That was a great gameday. I had to work (I was a server at the time), but I didn't mind as the OSU crowd tipped very well that day haha.
The two big dog conferences are now, for all intents and purposes, extensions of and beholden to their media owners. The Big 10 and SEC are “cover names” for what is in reality the Fox Sports conference and the ESPN conference. The Apple+ streaming conference just doesn’t rate. If you can’t get your product distributed on television and cable, you are not going to compete with the big boys and can expect your primary assets (high visibility, revenue producing flagship teams) to be strip mined by the top tier media conglomerates. The NCAA, who in theory should play some sort of oversight role to maintain stability and integrity, is impotent and irrelevant. Yes, some of this sounds a bit tin-foil-hatish but I think it is reality.
The fact that SEC and Big 10 big brass sought out or responded favorably to the new rules imposed by media (Fox/ESPN) has provided valuable cover for schools that would otherwise be in Cal’s position. I’m thinking of Northwestern and Vanderbilt – institutions where academics and research remain primary. These schools understandably found their place in major conferences when college sports operated in a different era with different rules. If either the SEC or Big 10 had bungled themselves into the predicament that the Pac 12 finds itself in, these schools would likely be facing the same doom loop that Cal is looking down the barrel at.
I am a proud Cal alum and do not like any of this at all. I fondly recall watching (as recently as the 1990’s and even early 2000’s) when Michigan or Ohio State would win their rivalry game and all the players rushed to the sideline to grab their red roses. Yes – the Rose Bowl is what we play for! Sadly, those days are long gone. Selling out to the highest bidder is the new game (think Ricky Bobby in Talladega Nights shouting out to his corporate sponsors), college sports has been fully NASCAR-ized and monetized.
This was all foreseen by sages such as Dale Brown, former head basketball coach at LSU, as well as others. Seek out some of his interviews and videos from the late 1980’s and early 1990s – he saw and sounded the alarm around where all of this was headed, long before we had the BCS, CFP, expanded CFP and NCAA tourneys, transfer portal/NIL, and media-driven conference realignment.
I would love it if somewhere in the spreadsheets and deal making that is going on behind the scenes that # of nobel laureates, history and tradition, geographic affinity, and consideration for the “student athletes” were major factors but sadly they are not. The Arizona (and presumably Arizona St) case proves this out. Would a major conference rather have (a) two average/below average academic schools in smaller media markets but with one of them bringing along the potential for top-tier, national revenue generating ability (Arizona basketball), or (b) two elite, powerhouse academic institutions in larger media markets but with little/no near-term potential for their major sports programs to be nationally relevant? I think the answer to this question is playing out before our eyes right now.
It's doom, but I don't think we're at Doooooooom yet. We already knew UW and UO were the top 2 targets. Cal could still get an offer, for less money with UCLA's Calimony filling the breach during a transition period.
Agree that our leadership has sucked badly in many situations but I don't think Cal has much leverage or autonomy in the conference collapse. We're just caught up in the maelstrom.
Cal could get an offer but it's very likely to be the lowest of lowballs. I'd like to join the B1G under circumstances where we can compete, not simply become Rutgers West.
Beggars can't be choosers. Clearly, Cal can't easily choose to turn down an invite from the B1G if extended such an opportunity. The burden of debt service on Cal Memorial would be crippling with revenue of under $5 million per year, which is what MWC membership might get. You can kiss off 10 to 12 sponsored sports immediately.
If the B1G offered $25 million per year in Year 1 with escalations to full shares within 6 to 8 years, take it and be grateful you aren't being relegated to mid-major status with no shot at a Power conference membership. 'Cuz that's Cal's position, right now.
But from what I see you saying, if Cal got an invitation similar to what Rutgers got from the B1G, you'd sneer at it because you're sure it'd be declasse to accept.
If we get an offer to the Big10 with a 25% share for a decade and then a full share we take it. You can borrow off that full share and hold the ship together until then. We will never climb out of the MWC.
I would gladly take the Rutgers deal. The Rutgers deal at least has a path to eventual full payment and even a reduced payment in the present would be more than MWC, PacX AppleTV deal and hopefully be as much or more than the Big12. Plus if we are able to take a reduced payout but still get our Calimony then we could weather that for 5-6 years.
Rutgers even hit full payment. They just took an extra loan (in part because they're Rutgers, in part because they were trying to fill the gap). Like you said, UCLA (who starts with a full share) would be out equivalent of the loan.
Edited to add that Rutgers came in at a little below 50% in year 1. We won't get the UO share but we maybe could get around 50%. (I saw somewhere that Fox valued UO at around $40M which would be about 2/3 share. Not sure if it's true but it seems feasible.)
Rutgers leveled up to full over 6 years. And they subsequently took a loan from the conference while we could possibly just take from UCLA during the escalation phase. I would choose the Rutgers situation 100/100 times.
If the college presidents want us, they'll get us since athletic dollars are just a fraction of the whole pie.
Cal - I am invincible and you have made me this way.
I am the third generation of my family to be Bears fans. Nearly half a century ago, I sat in traffic and had terrible parking only to sit in nosebleeds to watch us lose to San Jose State. I've furiously dialed on the phone to try to get classes on Tele*Bears only to get shut out. I've been hassled by the local colorful characters every time I visit Berkeley's well-textured roads and sidewalks.
Year after year, I hope for the best and am crushed by sub-par performance on the field, court, [not you, Cal watersports], and track. Over and over, you find ways to ensure that I am exposed to challenges that force me to adapt and endure.
And yet, I will not quit. I will not die. I have followed you across the country from Texas, Mississippi, North Carolina, Indiana and other places afar. As I watch my own body whither and lose its once okay-ish power, I will watch us atrophy as struggle to be competitive against once previously deemed lesser teams. But I will persevere. I will learn to love the rivalry of playing against new teams and traveling to new towns that I would have never been scheduled had Cal stayed in a Power 5 conference.
I have to admit - I didn't see this coming and it is diabolically clever attack. But, you have taught me how to smile and have a good time as I roll with your punches.
YOU CAN'T HURT ME, I'M A CAL BEAR FAN
Man. Don't know how much longer I can follow this madness. It is making me depressed (seriously). What a tragedy. I love Cal sports and the Pac so much. It's like the death of a loved one.
This shit is FAR from over. Expecting numerous twists and turns still. And soon reaching that point where I want to tune out for a while and come back when the dust settles.
I need a hug from Oski and for him to tell me.that everything is going to be OK.
Far from over? It’s over. Cal lost.
“ Board meetings are happening with the university regents at nearly every one of the above five institutions in the coming hours and days.”
And yet cricket chirps from Christ and Knowlton. I can understand keeping your cards close to your vest, but this smacks of sleepwalking off of a cliff’s edge.
Those two are a major reason why Cal’s in this mess.
I am legitimately depressed. Cal winning on Saturdays is one of the few things in life that gives me unbridled joy every time.
Then Uve been depressed for a while….
Correct
I’m going to play devils advocate here and argue why it’s a better bet to stay in the pac 12. As I mentioned before it’s a recruiting risk for udubb and uo to leave us for the big 10. Not saying it will happen but it’s definitely a risk if they leave us.
You put a team of oregon kids up against a team from other states and they’re finishing just ahead of Alaska, and the Dakota states and just behind Wyoming and Montana.
Look. Not trying to win you over, but a year ago it was rumored Apple was buying espn in 2024. 6 months ago espn was announcing they’re going full stream by 2025. A week ago espn was bootlicking at Apple for a streaming deal with Apple to which espn got crickets.
I believe wholeheartedly espn is being bought by Apple and I also believe that there will be an axe to grind (pun intended) with York mark and the rest of the b12 clowns.
If you look at the actual specifics of what Apple is wanting to bring to the market you see that streaming can generate twice the revenue from the same number of viewers due to cpm impressions billing which also happens to be 1000x more appealing to advertisers.
They make slightly less in sub fees but massively more in ad revenue. And they offer the product at less than half the cost. Remember when Deloreans were being marketed at 5 times the going rate of a mustang? I do. How’d that work out?
Remember when Costco offered gas at 75% of the guy down the street?
Markets always find the better value and it’s only a matter of time.
You have the most valuable company in the world and the biggest company in the world at that outside of China construction bank offering a product that is .5 of the competitors. You also have all the current market players kissing ass of said company to get in. Yet here we are again.
Fiat APATHY!
I personally like the Apple play and since none of us have seen the payout how can we criticize it.
And I would love to see Yormark and co come crying for aid to the richest company in the world which was founded by a cal alum and run by numerous cal alums begging for a lifeline. That would tickle me after all of the tampering this jackass and his team of cfb trolls have done.
The Apple option only has a chance at working if the conference doesn't collapse. Each team leaving cuts the subscriptions. Arizona seems to be a done deal so the dominos are likely to just tumble.
I agree. However I also haven’t seen the deal and neither has anyone else. People close to Apple had hinted the deal was better than 20 by about 10 mil then everyone went silent except the big 12 provocateurs. Saying “it’s 20 mil” then today “oh our bad it’s actually low 20s” now “oh the sub bonuses are worth above 50 if everyone who currently watches p12 subs”
Personally I think it’s 29.17 million per year with a sub bonus of 1.5 per per month ;)
This is why Haas and furd are top tier business schools and Arizona and b12 are not. If this was poker I would be loving it. Risk aversion is never successful.
I've seen that Apple is really trying to make it happen, even trying to pull a linear partner in to sweeten things and bump up the price. If we get up around 30 then I think the Pac can hold. The broadcasters just aren't looking to overpay like they did a few years ago so it's tough.
You're right, that the deal hasn't been released. But the relevant schools certainly aren't acting like it's competitive. Maybe it's like a prisoner's dilemma where the PAC would be in the best position by holding together. Unfortunately, it looks like a critical mass is jumping.
Also remember that schools are huge bureaucracies with a lot of fixed costs. Apple is (as reported) kinda acting like a tech company and huge public institutions just can't deal with uncertainty.
My wife attended Mills College, and it's collapse has been horrific for her. Now I know better how she feels. The thought of Cal not having all the Olympic sports, and being such a paragon of scholar athleticism, would cut me off at the knees. I know nothing is done yet,. but I'm still mourning the loss of the LA schools. This is just too much for my passionate Cal fandom to handle without agony. Go Bears now. Go Bears in the past. Go Bears forever goddamn it!
Hang in there, bud.
Here is my $0.02 on this whole situation, and why the Pac-12 missed the big picture.
Conference re-alignment and media deals are in essence, the transfer portal and NIL for teams. The college football landscape has changed radically over the past five years and the Pac-12 and its’s member institutional leaders (presidents, AD’s and even mega-donors) have been asleep at the switch.
The conference has been operating under the (faulty) assumption that these changes and disruptions are relatively minor and can be managed, rather than the game changers that they are. We can lament the dramatic diminishing importance of conference loyalty, local rivalries, history, and tradition but these things are relics of bygone days or at best, secondary factors to what counts today – which is nothing more than money or media.
To that effect, here is my take on the “vulturing” of Pac 12 teams.
USC and UCLA are attractive for obvious reasons. USC is a football blue blood and UCLA is a basketball blue blood. In the current era, this means:
• USC football can and should be expected to compete for CFP and major bowl spots every year – this provides high revenue potential (payback for a media deal) on a reliable basis
• UCLA offers similar potential in the basketball area, reliable NCAA tourney team with realistic Final Four aspirations in more years than not.
• Neither are slouches in their secondary sports and the greater LA media market is a plus but not the major driving factor
Washington and Oregon offer similar, albeit slightly less compelling packages than USC and UCLA – this is why the LA schools were “scavenged” first.
• Both of these schools have solid football programs and have shown the ability to compete for major bowls and have made appearances in the CFP.
• Importantly, these schools have shown that mediocrity (let alone the dismal performance that has plagued Cal in the recent past) will not be tolerated. Their down periods are brief and it is understood that performance at a high level is the year-in and year-out expectation.
• This translates to an expectation (in dollars and cents) that these teams will be competing for major dollars bowls and CFP appearances
Arizona comes next – why, because they are (along with Gonzaga and UCLA) one of the few basketball blue bloods and can offer any conference and their bean counters a reliable NCAA tourney participant and a Final Four aspirant (which translates to ratings and $$$) in more years than not. It is that simple
Utah is interesting is they are up and coming, particularly in football. Oregon St. is where Utah was 5-7 years ago but has the disadvantage of little history and a small market.
Cal and Stanford, sadly, have abysmal recent history and the other conference chieftains (Big 10, Big 12, ACC) looking at the bottom line don’t see much of anything worth pursuing.
• Stanford, 10 years ago in the days of Andrew Luck, Christian McCaffrey, Tight End U, and Toby Gerhardt, would have made for a compelling conversation. Stanford basketball was prominent and attractive 5-10 years before that. Unfortunately in the days of media and dollars, “what have you done for me lately” is all that matters
• Cal’s story is worse. Nothing noteworthy to speak of on the football front since Tedford and this board has rightly proclaimed that we have had one of, if not, the worst 3 year spell in basketball of any major program. Sadly, this is our brand and baggage right now. Hopefully Madsen can change things up but I fear it might be too late.
What does all this mean. For all of the pomp and prestige that major academic institutions like Cal and Stanford have, we (and the conference at large) have misread a major dislocation and the impacts of this will be far reaching and while perhaps not permanent, are likely to be generational.
I wouldn't quite say NOTHING noteworthy for Cal since the Tedford days since we did produce a #1 QB pick in Jared Goff. But yeah, we are in the worst possible position at the worst possible time.
This is mostly spot on. Only quibbles are that football matters far more/brings in far more viewers/money than basketball. And market size matters. The LA market really boosts USC.
USC is worth about double the B10 median, UO is slightly above the B10 median (because people in OR really care about the Ducks and Uncle Phil has made them cool to the youngs), and UW and UCLA are slightly below. Right now, nobody else in the Pac12 is close to those 4 in value but a booming population and local passion for college football means Utah will be worth what UW and UCLA are now by 2040.
UCLA lucked out and was just riding USC's coattails.
A huge problem Cal and Stanford have is that non-alums in the Bay Area just don't seem to care all that much about Cal or Stanford football (unlike non-alums in OR and UT), so the Bay Area market isn't as valuable as its population size would indicate it should be.
And yeah, many Pac teams outside of the LA schools should have prepared for this scenario dealcades ago.
That last line said it all, and Cal fans deserve better, though I can’t say the same for the faculty who treat football as if it’s beneath them.
Can’t believe this is what the schools of John Elway, Aaron Rodgers, Marshawn Lynch and Bill Walsh (as a coach) are being relegated to.
As a Bay Area Michigan alum, I REALLY hope the B1G finds a way to get Cal and Stanford into the conference. And that's not just for selfish reasons in getting to attend Michigan games without having to travel across multiple times zones; it's because of how much we have in common with UC-Berkeley as a university. Hell, we even share the same colors.
Having said that, I wouldn't lose hope yet, Cal fans. Cal and Stanford would be great additions for their academic prestige alone. I know the B1G university presidents are salivating at the thought of adding academic powerhouses like Cal and Stanford alongside schools like Michigan, Northwestern, Wisconsin, Illinois, and Purdue. And the Big XII is not a good fit for Cal and Stanford for that very reason. If they're willing to accept a lower revenue share than UCLA, USC, Oregon, Washington, and the existing members (which would still be significantly more than what they're getting from the Pac-??, with greater potential for growth due to the wider TV exposure), then there's no reason why a deal can't be worked out. The B1G would likely also want Cal to present a concrete plan for how it plans to alleviate its heavy debt load without needing subsidies from the B1G.
Thanks man, much appreciated. I always knew Michigan fans were better than OSU fans.
Interesting though that Drake (UC prez) was prez at tOSU.
Cal: "What are my chances?"
B1G: "Not good."
Cal: "You mean “not good” like… one out of a hundred?"
B1G: "I'd say.. more like one out of a million."
Cal: (slowly reacts) "So you're telling me there's a chance? … yeah!!"
#RoseBowlOrBust
I know this is an unpopular opinion here, but I think the mix of elitism and outright bigotry towards BYU likely contributed to this. We could’ve added them years ago, with all the impacts of that brand. We refused because of their religious leaning. How many other opportunities did our university veto with Stanford?
Or we could have taken a bunch of Big12 schools last summer.
1000% this. An unbelievably moronic business decision (followed by more elitist, moronic decisions) I’ve bitched about for years. But hey, at least we took that stand; look where it’s helped get us!
Maybe it's because I'm not an alum, but I have never understood this. Why would anyone care if fan culture doesn't mix? Football is football. It's the same sport whether or not you're culture's mix or clash. Why would that even be an issue?
Pac presidents wanted to think that athletic conferences were a social club rather than football media alliances.
It's amusing how "lack of success/interest" is why Cal and Furd are being given the cold shoulder, while Maryland/Rutgers/UCLA have a similar lack of results and fan support as the Bay Area schools. UC Los Angeles was lucky enough to get an invite thanks to their brother from another mother I suppose. Oh well, as long as they are firing the cannon and we have the Big Game to look forward to I will be there. B1G, XII, etc won't get a second of my time however. If they don't want my beloved Golden Bears, they won't get me. Enjoy $1 off your next media deal courtesy of yours truly. Roll on you Bears!
I think there's still a ticket to B1G coming. The school presidents want us in their consortium, Fox (and other networks) don't want to pay to make that happen. Athletics only represents a piece of the total financial pie (Big Ten Academic Alliance already does over $11B in research/year). Remember, schools usually subsidize athletic departments.
I think the issue is more about who pays for what. There are lots of things that can be done to offset costs to networks like smaller share sizes and loans from the conference (like Rutgers got), plus some potential UCLA payments.
Rutgers and Maryland just happened to be in the right place, at the right time.
I can’t believe Cal and Rutgers played a meaningless makeup game due to 9/11 in late fall 2001 to avoid a winless season and 22 years later Cal might be left behind while Rutgers is in the Big10.
Big Ten alum lurking here.
Rutgers brings NYC/NJ which is the #1 media market in the US.
Maryland brings the DC, Baltimore, Northern Virginia markets.
The problem with so many on this thread is you fail to see what has been going on in front of you for several decades: the media rights landscape has been shifting and the Big Ten (and others) have spent the last 20 odd years positioning themselves for that new environment. Meanwhile the Pac 12 schools have been sitting arrogantly on the sidelines. I say arrogantly because several years back the Big Ten reached out to the Pac Ten with an offer of a full merger between the two conferences. The Pac 12 turned the Big Ten down flatly and even left some locker room bulletin board quotes about many Pac 12 members couldn't envision themselves in the same conference as Iowa State (we laughed...Iowa State isn't in the Big Ten). But make no mistake about it, the message was received.
Since then the Big Ten has continued to expand strategically to the point it now includes the #1, 2, 3 and 4 media markets with multiple mid-size markets as well.
So, you can all go on about "Rutgers and Maryland" getting lucky, or you can start thinking about how you're going to clean up the mess you've all set yourselves up for.
You truly live up to your name. I don’t recall any such merger between the Pac12 and Big10 potentially merging and the Pac12 saying no. If true, please post a link to your claim.
I am not in charge so I didn’t make this mess, therefore it isn’t mine to clean up.
You’re right the TV landscape is changing, the traditional cable subscription model is dying and the Big10 was able to get a good deal with Fox/ESPN by including Rutgers and Maryland when the cable model was still doing well. Rutgers and Maryland were lucky, Rutgers sucks as a program and has no real fan base. Maryland is a little better. Nothing those schools did earned them a right to the Big10, even the Big10 and those schools knew they were lucky or else they wouldn’t have came in at a smaller share/payout when they first entered the Big10.
The link below references a meeting back in August of 2021 between the Big Ten, Pac 12 and ACC which was in response to the SEC poaching Texas and Oklahoma from the Big 12.
Of note, the ACC's commissioner, Jim Phillips had just left Northwestern to become the ACC commissioner and Kevin Warren had just joined the Big Ten as its commissioner. Being new in their roles and having the ability to read the tea leaves on the wall, they were both ready to make something happen that was bigger than a vague press release about an alliance.
You'll notice that the outcome from this meeting was nothing but a lot of vague puffery about "partnerships" and "alliances" and "stability". But make no mistake about it...these gentlemen, along with all the other assembled dignitaries did NOT get together to discuss vague alliances. You could handle that level of strategic thinking with an email that cc'd everyone's PR team.
The Pac 12 contingent was road block to any further discussions of either a merger or any form of true "alliance".
Flash forward a year from the "alliance" meeting and the Big Ten which already held access to the #1, #3, #4 media markets (plus numerous other top 25 markets) only needs the #2 media market in order to compete with the SEC. USC and UCLA both come to realize they can't get the > $50 million annual revenue deal from within a conference that not only has the #2 media market but plays most of it's games set off on a geographic island hidden behind a 2-3 hour time zone difference from the population base you NEED if you're going to justify $50 million a year. So, you get last summer's news that USC and UCLA are leaving for the Big Ten.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/24/sports/ncaafootball/acc-bigten-pac12-sec.html
The problem is that, unlike Maryland and Rutgers, Cal and Stanford don't have the TV market to make up for their lack of competitiveness on the field. The combined populations of NYC/NJ and the DMV dwarf the population of Northern California by many, many millions. The East Coast has tons of B1G alumni (in fact, the B1G more well-represented on the East Coast in terms of alumni than many East Coast schools of similar size). That's a big part of the reason why the conference added Rutgers and Maryland; it wasn't so much for the value of those schools, it was more to take advantage of the B1G's enormous alumni base in NY/NJ and the DMV. In Northern California, Michigan and maybe Illinois and Purdue are the only current B1G schools that have anything resembling a large alumni presence.
Say that to the hordes of tOSU fans that showed up to Memorial Stadium when they were in town lol
Ah yes, I remember. I was at that game, now that you mention it (2012, I think). That is the one and only time I have worn the gear of a school other than Michigan to a football game. The fact that your colors are so similar to ours made it palatable. 😀
Hahaha. We appreciate your lended support.
I think 2012 is correct, without checking... That was a great gameday. I had to work (I was a server at the time), but I didn't mind as the OSU crowd tipped very well that day haha.
Some further thoughts ….
The two big dog conferences are now, for all intents and purposes, extensions of and beholden to their media owners. The Big 10 and SEC are “cover names” for what is in reality the Fox Sports conference and the ESPN conference. The Apple+ streaming conference just doesn’t rate. If you can’t get your product distributed on television and cable, you are not going to compete with the big boys and can expect your primary assets (high visibility, revenue producing flagship teams) to be strip mined by the top tier media conglomerates. The NCAA, who in theory should play some sort of oversight role to maintain stability and integrity, is impotent and irrelevant. Yes, some of this sounds a bit tin-foil-hatish but I think it is reality.
The fact that SEC and Big 10 big brass sought out or responded favorably to the new rules imposed by media (Fox/ESPN) has provided valuable cover for schools that would otherwise be in Cal’s position. I’m thinking of Northwestern and Vanderbilt – institutions where academics and research remain primary. These schools understandably found their place in major conferences when college sports operated in a different era with different rules. If either the SEC or Big 10 had bungled themselves into the predicament that the Pac 12 finds itself in, these schools would likely be facing the same doom loop that Cal is looking down the barrel at.
I am a proud Cal alum and do not like any of this at all. I fondly recall watching (as recently as the 1990’s and even early 2000’s) when Michigan or Ohio State would win their rivalry game and all the players rushed to the sideline to grab their red roses. Yes – the Rose Bowl is what we play for! Sadly, those days are long gone. Selling out to the highest bidder is the new game (think Ricky Bobby in Talladega Nights shouting out to his corporate sponsors), college sports has been fully NASCAR-ized and monetized.
This was all foreseen by sages such as Dale Brown, former head basketball coach at LSU, as well as others. Seek out some of his interviews and videos from the late 1980’s and early 1990s – he saw and sounded the alarm around where all of this was headed, long before we had the BCS, CFP, expanded CFP and NCAA tourneys, transfer portal/NIL, and media-driven conference realignment.
I would love it if somewhere in the spreadsheets and deal making that is going on behind the scenes that # of nobel laureates, history and tradition, geographic affinity, and consideration for the “student athletes” were major factors but sadly they are not. The Arizona (and presumably Arizona St) case proves this out. Would a major conference rather have (a) two average/below average academic schools in smaller media markets but with one of them bringing along the potential for top-tier, national revenue generating ability (Arizona basketball), or (b) two elite, powerhouse academic institutions in larger media markets but with little/no near-term potential for their major sports programs to be nationally relevant? I think the answer to this question is playing out before our eyes right now.
Look away, folks. It'll happen for us eventually, but they are gonna drag us until they can steal us for nothing.
👆
They better get over themselves and accept whatever comes their way.
It's doom, but I don't think we're at Doooooooom yet. We already knew UW and UO were the top 2 targets. Cal could still get an offer, for less money with UCLA's Calimony filling the breach during a transition period.
Agree that our leadership has sucked badly in many situations but I don't think Cal has much leverage or autonomy in the conference collapse. We're just caught up in the maelstrom.
Cal could get an offer but it's very likely to be the lowest of lowballs. I'd like to join the B1G under circumstances where we can compete, not simply become Rutgers West.
Beggars can't be choosers. Clearly, Cal can't easily choose to turn down an invite from the B1G if extended such an opportunity. The burden of debt service on Cal Memorial would be crippling with revenue of under $5 million per year, which is what MWC membership might get. You can kiss off 10 to 12 sponsored sports immediately.
If the B1G offered $25 million per year in Year 1 with escalations to full shares within 6 to 8 years, take it and be grateful you aren't being relegated to mid-major status with no shot at a Power conference membership. 'Cuz that's Cal's position, right now.
But from what I see you saying, if Cal got an invitation similar to what Rutgers got from the B1G, you'd sneer at it because you're sure it'd be declasse to accept.
Eff that noise.
Avi: At this point, becoming Rutgers West doesn't sound so bad.
If we get an offer to the Big10 with a 25% share for a decade and then a full share we take it. You can borrow off that full share and hold the ship together until then. We will never climb out of the MWC.
I would gladly take the Rutgers deal. The Rutgers deal at least has a path to eventual full payment and even a reduced payment in the present would be more than MWC, PacX AppleTV deal and hopefully be as much or more than the Big12. Plus if we are able to take a reduced payout but still get our Calimony then we could weather that for 5-6 years.
Rutgers even hit full payment. They just took an extra loan (in part because they're Rutgers, in part because they were trying to fill the gap). Like you said, UCLA (who starts with a full share) would be out equivalent of the loan.
Edited to add that Rutgers came in at a little below 50% in year 1. We won't get the UO share but we maybe could get around 50%. (I saw somewhere that Fox valued UO at around $40M which would be about 2/3 share. Not sure if it's true but it seems feasible.)
Rutgers leveled up to full over 6 years. And they subsequently took a loan from the conference while we could possibly just take from UCLA during the escalation phase. I would choose the Rutgers situation 100/100 times.
If the college presidents want us, they'll get us since athletic dollars are just a fraction of the whole pie.