Nichole Auerbach from the athletic is reporting a call is scheduled tomorrow with the ACC presidents to discuss and potentially add CAL, Stanford, and SMU.
Again, NC State is the least self-aware of the likely no voters. They are delusional if they believe they're going with UNC; UNC is much more likely to pair up with UVA if they move (UVA and UNC are both AAU members, which is a big deal for the B1G). That being said, if the ACC makes this move and comes up with a plan for the extra revenue that satisfies the magnificent five and the delusional two (NC State and Virginia Tech), the conference will remain stable for at least the next several years.
I still believe that Notre Dame will have to make an extra concession for this to happen (play seven ACC opponents that count in the standings for the ACC team, join the league outright, or try to convince NBC to pursue buying games from ESPN to make a full season package between Notre Dame and ACC games to pair with NBC's B1G package) and that the ACC should strongly pursue putting a tier 1 matchup on week zero going forward regardless of the outcome of the expansion talks. If Cal, Stanford, and SMU are added, moving an SMU home game to AT&T Stadium against Notre Dame, Clemson, Florida State, Miami, or any other team that is expected to contend that year makes perfect sense for a week zero spectacle.
The movie theater deal is interesting and could add revenue down the line if successful, but I'm not sure who benefits the most between the theaters, the ACC, and ESPN. I'm not as intrigued by the CW move; it may end up being sneaky good or it could be just like LIV Golf with few people outside the ACC footprint watching.
Apparently NC state politics are quite strong on this and will demand that UNC and NC State remain together. If only the same could be said about the UC Regents.
Don't believe that for a second. NC St. is not an AAU member. If UNC is invited to the B1G, NC St. will not be. Same goes for Virginia Tech if UVA goes to the B1G with UNC.
There is definite poor decisions made on AD and coach hires over the last ten years for both football and basketball. I would stop short of saying they were intentionally made to see the teams fail. I have briefly met the chancellor and AD a couple of times; they seem like nice enough people, but don’t seem to have been as engaged as they should have been in seeing Cal is not left behind.
It is disappointing to me that President Michael Drake, coming from Ohio State, when being briefed on the negotiations between UCLA and B1G before any decision was made, did nothing to keep Cal and UCLA together. Even if USC left, having UCLA remain in the PAC-X would have resulted in an annual school payout in excess of $40 million from some combination of ESPN, Fox, Apple, or Amazon.
It seems that Clueless Carol, Empty Suit Jim, and The Coot have all been "nice enough people" at a time when EXCEPTIONAL PEOPLE are required. They have one thing in common when it comes to Cal athletics, they are all FAILURES. They are not visionaries, they are not leaders, they are not doers. They are weak, pathetic, failures at a time when diversity has displaced excellence. Fiat Lux has become Fiat Umbra.
If we don’t get into the ACC, and that’s looking more likely with the recent reports coming out, we’re absolutely f*cked. Not only will the program be on the brink of collapse, but the players (rightfully so) will be demoralized at the very moment they need to be locked in. The subset of fans that are still invested despite this never ending sh*tshow will become apathetic.
If Knowlton and CC had even a shred of integrity they would resign in shame. But we all know that’s not happening.
The truth is the only schools that deserve any empathy are Oregon State and Washington State. They have been treated like absolute roadkill in this process.
The irony is they are likely to beat the brakes off alot of the schools that got a lifeline from other conferences, especially OSU. They might win 10 games this year with a doomed program.
And, if the ACC deal goes through, OSU should be considered for further expansion to bulwark the west coast group on the north with SD St. doing the same on the south thereby hemming in the two LA turncoats.
The latest reports from the same sources who were touting the forthcoming membership in the ACC for Cal and Stanford reinforces my belief that those in favor of expansion have been emitting a lot of hype in hope of convincing all the schools to vote yes. This is the same BS that was being circulated about all the PAC 12 schools being in favor of the Apple deal. Now the reality is becoming evident. None of the four schools have changed their views and it is rumored that Miami shares their view. The Virginia schools are rumored to be lukewarm on adding west coast schools. I doubt that the ACC will actually hold an official vote unless the outcome is certain to be unanimous to avoid publicly displaying how disunited the schools are. Meanwhile the clock is ticking, the football season has begun and Cal has only three games scheduled for next year. What’s the fallback plan if any?
I don't see this happening unless the ACC has already resigned itself to losing FSU and Clemson. If they harbor any hope of holding on to their two biggest brands, it would be stupid of the conference leadership and the other schools to alienate them. If this vote happens, I think it's far more likely that a few 'Yes' votes flip to 'No' than vice-versa.
Personally, as a Bay Area Michigan alum, I would love to see Cal and Stanford join the B1G. I'm still holding out hope that it happens. Maybe they're letting Cal and Stanford twist in the wind to deprive them of any last shred of leverage (and dignity) before extending them an invitation to join at a revenue share of a dollar and a milkshake. Unfortunately, what's more likely is that the B1G's "media partners" (i.e., Fox Sports, CBS, NBC) have totally rejected the idea, which pretty much ends the conversation. They're the ones calling the shots now.
I still see this as an attempt to bring in enough additional revenue to placate FSU and Clemson, but the ACC still needs to do more beyond the CW deal and the movie theater deal. The extra cash from the concessions proposed by the potential expansion schools helps, but the ACC needs to ask something in return from Notre Dame for pushing this expansion. Notre Dame doesn't have to give up football independence to make this work (although it would certainly help), but agreeing to seven ACC games (with Stanford being an annual one) and urging NBC to try to buy some ACC games from ESPN to create a doubleheader package with the B1G for the full season would be a great start.
Long live the PAC! I know all of the financial reasons why joining the ACC is preferred, but I really wish there was a way to stay in and rebuild the PAC. Yes, it might only amount to, at best, $20M/year, but as a fan and probably for most athletes, I think it would like it better to compete at a lower level against regional rivals, aka, some AAC and MW schools to be added in. Who knows, this may turn out to be the default anyway, but if it does happen, I think it could be argued that the PAC should remain a "power conference" and build it back up. BTW - I think the current deals that the BIG, Big12, and ACC have won't last many more years; the viewership of linear and cable just dipped below 50%! So streaming is the future and we should lock up Apple and Amazon now.
I don’t know where those $20m per year are gonna come from… Cal & Stanford are worth more than $20m each. Washington St & Oregon St are probably worth about $4-10m each. But who’s gonna pay that for the Pac 4? Even poaching the 5 next best teams out there (SMU, Boise, Fresno, SDSU… UNLV?), to get back to the minimum number of teams required to field a conference, wouldn’t get media interest.
Getting into another super conference is Cal’s only hope.
If turned down by the ACC who would Stanford and Cal deign to associate with? I suppose they could hold their noses and their terrible football teams would stay in the Pac.
I have been beating the "rebuild the PAC" drum from the start. The lack of serious discussion/consideration from Cal and Stanford about that option has been a serious strategic mistake. They have reduced their negotiation leverage (that last minute Big12 rumor was a laughable attempt to get some leverage back) and it is poisoning the well with our future conference mates when it inevitably becomes our only option.
ACC still might happen. But even if it does, AD's for both schools need to be fired.
In the end I think this still happens, because for the ACC it’s basically a choice between free money and no free money. They will want to take the money. Delays are probably mostly related to the UNC shooting and the incoming hurricane.
I tend to agree with you sy re: following the $$$ but the length that this has dragged on, coupled with ESPN’s ACC shill reporting yesterday they still don’t have the votes, plus Thamel today, really does make me wonder. Hopefully it is just the shooting and the hurricane, but….
What the hell, let's have some fun with this while were waiting for something to happen. If you were King of the ACC what would you do anent expanding the conference to be in tune with college football's new "go big movement"? Here's my play:
1 - Conference to be called Coast 2 Coast Conference (C2C)
2 - Expand from current 15 to 24 teams in 3 divisions
3 - Schools added (poaching must be realistic) - Cal, Stanford, Ore. St., Wa. St., San Diego St., SMU, Rice, Navy, Tulane (or Tulsa)
4 - Divisions - 8 teams each
a - West / Mid West = Cal, Stanford, SD St. Ore. St., Wa. St., SMU, Rice., Tulane (or Tulsa)
b - N East = Syracuse, BC, L'ville, Va., Va. Tech, ND, Pitt, Navy
c - S East = WF, Duke, NC, NC St, Clem, Ga Tech, FSU, UM
5 - Each team plays their 7 division mates, 2 non-conference games, 3 inter-conference games (rotating thru other divisions)
6 - Playoffs = 4 teams, 3 division champs plus next best record in conference
7 - Championship = in New Orleans Superdome - two playoff game winners
I don't see this working as some of those programs aren't strong enough (ESPN would also be sure to push back). If the ACC takes Cal, Stanford, and SMU but can't get anything more out of Notre Dame, the best options would be either San Diego St., UConn, Tulane, or all three of them. A 20-team ACC could play a ten-game conference schedule with one permanent opponent while rotating the others in a 1-9-9 format while an 18-team ACC could go to nine games with a 1-8-8 format. At 17, you'd have to allow an odd number of games against Notre Dame to count towards the standings. Furthermore, a second round of conference playoffs would have to be embraced by the B1G and the SEC and I doubt that's going to happen as it would prolong the season and weaken at-large resumes with unnecessary losses.
Good comments. I don't think U Conn has the academic chops to get in. Plus, they seem rather uncommitted to football (obviously great BB though). I think the ACC needs to backfill in the west. To me, Rice would be preferable to U Conn. SD St., Tulane, and Rice would make really good additions and at 21 teams you could have 3 divisions of 7. Oregon St. would be a good addition if either Rice or Tulane were not interested
UConn is tied with Texas A&M (an AAU school) in the US News & World Report rankings and has a powerhouse basketball program and solid baseball program. Rice's athletics program overall doesn't stack up (although the academics and the Houston market are attractive).
Both California and Texas would need shoring up and UConn doesn't accomplish that. Adding either Rice (Texas shore up) or Ore St. (Calif shore up) accomplishes that. All of this assumes SD St. and Tulane are in the fold. Never thought of A&M as an academics-strong school (Guess I heard too many of Johnny Manziel's press conferences)
I added Navy because Notre Dame and Navy go way back and it's critical to keep ND in the fold. Also, Cal and Navy have developed strong rivalries in crew and rugby
Hey W4C crew, is there going to be a non-Cal game thread? ;)
Nichole Auerbach from the athletic is reporting a call is scheduled tomorrow with the ACC presidents to discuss and potentially add CAL, Stanford, and SMU.
Let’s all hold our breath.
My understanding is that they probably wouldn't be calling this meeting if they didn't have the votes, so most likely we are in.
But we are also Cal, so always anticipate the worst.
did she distinguish between a meeting and a vote?
nvm it says "discuss and potentially vote"
https://theathletic.com/4823343/2023/08/31/acc-stanford-cal-smu-meeting/
Sleep well tonight. Wake up and make yourself a celebration mimosa in the morning
We will find out tomorrow. Tomorrow is the day they announce postponement of the meeting.
Again, NC State is the least self-aware of the likely no voters. They are delusional if they believe they're going with UNC; UNC is much more likely to pair up with UVA if they move (UVA and UNC are both AAU members, which is a big deal for the B1G). That being said, if the ACC makes this move and comes up with a plan for the extra revenue that satisfies the magnificent five and the delusional two (NC State and Virginia Tech), the conference will remain stable for at least the next several years.
I still believe that Notre Dame will have to make an extra concession for this to happen (play seven ACC opponents that count in the standings for the ACC team, join the league outright, or try to convince NBC to pursue buying games from ESPN to make a full season package between Notre Dame and ACC games to pair with NBC's B1G package) and that the ACC should strongly pursue putting a tier 1 matchup on week zero going forward regardless of the outcome of the expansion talks. If Cal, Stanford, and SMU are added, moving an SMU home game to AT&T Stadium against Notre Dame, Clemson, Florida State, Miami, or any other team that is expected to contend that year makes perfect sense for a week zero spectacle.
The movie theater deal is interesting and could add revenue down the line if successful, but I'm not sure who benefits the most between the theaters, the ACC, and ESPN. I'm not as intrigued by the CW move; it may end up being sneaky good or it could be just like LIV Golf with few people outside the ACC footprint watching.
Apparently NC state politics are quite strong on this and will demand that UNC and NC State remain together. If only the same could be said about the UC Regents.
Don't believe that for a second. NC St. is not an AAU member. If UNC is invited to the B1G, NC St. will not be. Same goes for Virginia Tech if UVA goes to the B1G with UNC.
If it came down to it, UNC would probably drop them, yeah. But the NC state government would fight it harder.
Any interest in becoming Cal AD?
Only if I can run the program remotely from Virginia lol
May as well, nobody is running it from Berkeley
I love you guys. But this site needs to stick to just breaking down film, etc. Don’t try to act like reporters when you’ve got zero information.
Making wild assumptions based on Twitter posts from people who are just making wild assumptions does nothing to help the cal community on this site.
Basically just trying to say your information is wrong
OK, then what is the truth? What is going on? Set us straight. Thanks in advance.
This is breaking my heart, folks.
The Cal administration wants football to fail.
Cal has spent over $400 million in stadium renovations over the last fifteen years. I don’t think the intent was to see the football team fail.
I wish I had faith in that reasoning my man. Instinctively, I just don’t.
It’s a different time now. Different regime, different imperatives, different campus zeitgeist altogether.
I just don’t know how else to interpret this abject administrative neglect anymore.
Football and its attendant culture no longer comports with Cal’s “institutional values.”
Maybe they’ll raze Memorial and replace it with another weed dispensary.
There is definite poor decisions made on AD and coach hires over the last ten years for both football and basketball. I would stop short of saying they were intentionally made to see the teams fail. I have briefly met the chancellor and AD a couple of times; they seem like nice enough people, but don’t seem to have been as engaged as they should have been in seeing Cal is not left behind.
It is disappointing to me that President Michael Drake, coming from Ohio State, when being briefed on the negotiations between UCLA and B1G before any decision was made, did nothing to keep Cal and UCLA together. Even if USC left, having UCLA remain in the PAC-X would have resulted in an annual school payout in excess of $40 million from some combination of ESPN, Fox, Apple, or Amazon.
It seems that Clueless Carol, Empty Suit Jim, and The Coot have all been "nice enough people" at a time when EXCEPTIONAL PEOPLE are required. They have one thing in common when it comes to Cal athletics, they are all FAILURES. They are not visionaries, they are not leaders, they are not doers. They are weak, pathetic, failures at a time when diversity has displaced excellence. Fiat Lux has become Fiat Umbra.
If we don’t get into the ACC, and that’s looking more likely with the recent reports coming out, we’re absolutely f*cked. Not only will the program be on the brink of collapse, but the players (rightfully so) will be demoralized at the very moment they need to be locked in. The subset of fans that are still invested despite this never ending sh*tshow will become apathetic.
If Knowlton and CC had even a shred of integrity they would resign in shame. But we all know that’s not happening.
The ONLY thing that tempers my disdain for the entire administration is that this all seems to have blindsided Stanford as well.
Great point!
But it still leaves me angry and fed up.
The truth is the only schools that deserve any empathy are Oregon State and Washington State. They have been treated like absolute roadkill in this process.
The irony is they are likely to beat the brakes off alot of the schools that got a lifeline from other conferences, especially OSU. They might win 10 games this year with a doomed program.
I like OSU as a dark horse for the CFP. They have been underrated for about four years+
And, if the ACC deal goes through, OSU should be considered for further expansion to bulwark the west coast group on the north with SD St. doing the same on the south thereby hemming in the two LA turncoats.
Wouldn’t shock me, can you imagine how fired up the team will be against the Oregons and USC of the world who basically left their school for dead?
They were one decent QB away from spanking the University of Spoiled Children last year.
The latest reports from the same sources who were touting the forthcoming membership in the ACC for Cal and Stanford reinforces my belief that those in favor of expansion have been emitting a lot of hype in hope of convincing all the schools to vote yes. This is the same BS that was being circulated about all the PAC 12 schools being in favor of the Apple deal. Now the reality is becoming evident. None of the four schools have changed their views and it is rumored that Miami shares their view. The Virginia schools are rumored to be lukewarm on adding west coast schools. I doubt that the ACC will actually hold an official vote unless the outcome is certain to be unanimous to avoid publicly displaying how disunited the schools are. Meanwhile the clock is ticking, the football season has begun and Cal has only three games scheduled for next year. What’s the fallback plan if any?
Agree.
I don't see this happening unless the ACC has already resigned itself to losing FSU and Clemson. If they harbor any hope of holding on to their two biggest brands, it would be stupid of the conference leadership and the other schools to alienate them. If this vote happens, I think it's far more likely that a few 'Yes' votes flip to 'No' than vice-versa.
Personally, as a Bay Area Michigan alum, I would love to see Cal and Stanford join the B1G. I'm still holding out hope that it happens. Maybe they're letting Cal and Stanford twist in the wind to deprive them of any last shred of leverage (and dignity) before extending them an invitation to join at a revenue share of a dollar and a milkshake. Unfortunately, what's more likely is that the B1G's "media partners" (i.e., Fox Sports, CBS, NBC) have totally rejected the idea, which pretty much ends the conversation. They're the ones calling the shots now.
I still see this as an attempt to bring in enough additional revenue to placate FSU and Clemson, but the ACC still needs to do more beyond the CW deal and the movie theater deal. The extra cash from the concessions proposed by the potential expansion schools helps, but the ACC needs to ask something in return from Notre Dame for pushing this expansion. Notre Dame doesn't have to give up football independence to make this work (although it would certainly help), but agreeing to seven ACC games (with Stanford being an annual one) and urging NBC to try to buy some ACC games from ESPN to create a doubleheader package with the B1G for the full season would be a great start.
Long live the PAC! I know all of the financial reasons why joining the ACC is preferred, but I really wish there was a way to stay in and rebuild the PAC. Yes, it might only amount to, at best, $20M/year, but as a fan and probably for most athletes, I think it would like it better to compete at a lower level against regional rivals, aka, some AAC and MW schools to be added in. Who knows, this may turn out to be the default anyway, but if it does happen, I think it could be argued that the PAC should remain a "power conference" and build it back up. BTW - I think the current deals that the BIG, Big12, and ACC have won't last many more years; the viewership of linear and cable just dipped below 50%! So streaming is the future and we should lock up Apple and Amazon now.
I don’t know where those $20m per year are gonna come from… Cal & Stanford are worth more than $20m each. Washington St & Oregon St are probably worth about $4-10m each. But who’s gonna pay that for the Pac 4? Even poaching the 5 next best teams out there (SMU, Boise, Fresno, SDSU… UNLV?), to get back to the minimum number of teams required to field a conference, wouldn’t get media interest.
Getting into another super conference is Cal’s only hope.
I'm sure Dykes is belly laughing at all this right now with chicken spaghetti sauce smeared across his orca-like face.
Imagine Memorial attendance this year if we struggle early and remain unhoused.
Meanwhile, Knowlton is swirling a delightful Merlot at Chez Panisse.
Pinot ...Pinot
If turned down by the ACC who would Stanford and Cal deign to associate with? I suppose they could hold their noses and their terrible football teams would stay in the Pac.
I have been beating the "rebuild the PAC" drum from the start. The lack of serious discussion/consideration from Cal and Stanford about that option has been a serious strategic mistake. They have reduced their negotiation leverage (that last minute Big12 rumor was a laughable attempt to get some leverage back) and it is poisoning the well with our future conference mates when it inevitably becomes our only option.
ACC still might happen. But even if it does, AD's for both schools need to be fired.
In the end I think this still happens, because for the ACC it’s basically a choice between free money and no free money. They will want to take the money. Delays are probably mostly related to the UNC shooting and the incoming hurricane.
I tend to agree with you sy re: following the $$$ but the length that this has dragged on, coupled with ESPN’s ACC shill reporting yesterday they still don’t have the votes, plus Thamel today, really does make me wonder. Hopefully it is just the shooting and the hurricane, but….
may you be a prophet
What the hell, let's have some fun with this while were waiting for something to happen. If you were King of the ACC what would you do anent expanding the conference to be in tune with college football's new "go big movement"? Here's my play:
1 - Conference to be called Coast 2 Coast Conference (C2C)
2 - Expand from current 15 to 24 teams in 3 divisions
3 - Schools added (poaching must be realistic) - Cal, Stanford, Ore. St., Wa. St., San Diego St., SMU, Rice, Navy, Tulane (or Tulsa)
4 - Divisions - 8 teams each
a - West / Mid West = Cal, Stanford, SD St. Ore. St., Wa. St., SMU, Rice., Tulane (or Tulsa)
b - N East = Syracuse, BC, L'ville, Va., Va. Tech, ND, Pitt, Navy
c - S East = WF, Duke, NC, NC St, Clem, Ga Tech, FSU, UM
5 - Each team plays their 7 division mates, 2 non-conference games, 3 inter-conference games (rotating thru other divisions)
6 - Playoffs = 4 teams, 3 division champs plus next best record in conference
7 - Championship = in New Orleans Superdome - two playoff game winners
I don't see this working as some of those programs aren't strong enough (ESPN would also be sure to push back). If the ACC takes Cal, Stanford, and SMU but can't get anything more out of Notre Dame, the best options would be either San Diego St., UConn, Tulane, or all three of them. A 20-team ACC could play a ten-game conference schedule with one permanent opponent while rotating the others in a 1-9-9 format while an 18-team ACC could go to nine games with a 1-8-8 format. At 17, you'd have to allow an odd number of games against Notre Dame to count towards the standings. Furthermore, a second round of conference playoffs would have to be embraced by the B1G and the SEC and I doubt that's going to happen as it would prolong the season and weaken at-large resumes with unnecessary losses.
Good comments. I don't think U Conn has the academic chops to get in. Plus, they seem rather uncommitted to football (obviously great BB though). I think the ACC needs to backfill in the west. To me, Rice would be preferable to U Conn. SD St., Tulane, and Rice would make really good additions and at 21 teams you could have 3 divisions of 7. Oregon St. would be a good addition if either Rice or Tulane were not interested
UConn is tied with Texas A&M (an AAU school) in the US News & World Report rankings and has a powerhouse basketball program and solid baseball program. Rice's athletics program overall doesn't stack up (although the academics and the Houston market are attractive).
Both California and Texas would need shoring up and UConn doesn't accomplish that. Adding either Rice (Texas shore up) or Ore St. (Calif shore up) accomplishes that. All of this assumes SD St. and Tulane are in the fold. Never thought of A&M as an academics-strong school (Guess I heard too many of Johnny Manziel's press conferences)
However, I would take Navy over Rice given the Cal-Navy rivalries in Crew and Rugby
Dang...I like the cut of your jib....Sounds like fun!
I don't think the military schools are realistic expansion targets with the way CFB is trending.
I added Navy because Notre Dame and Navy go way back and it's critical to keep ND in the fold. Also, Cal and Navy have developed strong rivalries in crew and rugby
Maybe it's another case of Kliavkoff's "the longer we wait for our media deal, the better our options get."
I wonder if that jackass had the nerve to show up at the CFB playoff meetings.