I really hope this is true, because the irony of Cal being saved by Notre Dame after turning up our nose at SMU, TCU, and BYU because they are “religious schools” would just be too delicious of a story.
I thought it might be guilt for The Immaculate Encroachment. Also, I tend to think it is more Furd they are rooting for and we're the tag along/alsoran
If what you're saying is true, this is very short-sighted by the ACC. I can see some of the scrub teams in the ACC not being able to compete with Cal, but some of those games would be must watch tv!
If what you're saying is true, this is very short-sighted by the ACC period I can see some of the scrub teams in the ACC not being able to compete with cow, but. Some of those games would be muSr watch tv
ACC isn’t likely to happen, per reports. Looks like we’re out of any viable options. What a sad and avoidable situation. Don’t really know where the program goes from here, can’t even imagine how the players must feel right now. Knowlton and Christ (among many others) should feel ashamed and embarrassed.
If we’re already facing an uphill battle, I have zero faith in Knowlton or Christ having the ability to flip votes in our favor. If ND and others tried and haven’t been successful, we’re cooked at this point.
That being said, nothing would make me happier than being proven wrong in this situation.
Honestly, I would have more faith in the Stanford people potentially flipping votes (along with Notre Dame and whoever their allies in the ACC are) than anyone from Cal. We are along for the ride here, thankfully tied to some powerful allies.
They should, but they won't. Christ is too busy with totally not being retired to lobby one or two more votes in our favor so a couple dozen programs will get cut. Truly a model in excellent leadership folks.
Most likely they don't have the votes yet. They might never have them but I wouldn't say it's over until they officially say they're closed to expansion.
100% correct. We'll hear all sorts of reports and leaks by parties with their own agendas. But nothing is over until we've either 1) been voted in or 2) have been told no. And we won't likely have an answer for (2) for a while since there are so many parties involved.
I believe Cal has about a dozen or so alums who are billionaires. If there were ever a time for one of them to pull a Phil Knight or T. Pickens and bankroll the program to give us some breathing room, its now.
If our options boil down to the MWC, a restructured PAC, or the ACC, I would lean towards the latter. Judging purely by TV ratings over the past 7 years, there seems to be limited interest in watching Cal take on low-profile opponents. Our most-watched conference games tend to be against USC, along with non-conference matches against Texas and Mississippi in 2016 and 2017. I believe this is because our fanbase becomes most energized by the prospect of upsetting high-profile teams. Opting for the ACC (or B1G) would open up opportunities to compete with marquee opponents. Among the remaining teams outside the power conferences, there wouldn't be the same level of excitement or interest at a time when we need strong viewership to secure favorable network deals in the upcoming media negotiations of the 2030s.
While our team's ultimate aspiration is always to strive for greatness, I think we merely need to maintain a level of competitiveness that gives us a decent chance, occasionally allowing us to upset teams we wouldn't normally expect to beat. This approach would lead to increased viewership and our survival, if not growth. I'm not convinced that joining the MWC or participating in the rebuilding of the PAC while dominating that league would significantly enhance our standing. The potential lack of visibility alone could relegate us to the realm of irrelevance.
John Milton once remarked, 'It is better to reign in Hell than to serve in Heaven.' However, in this scenario, I believe that for the Bears, it's preferable to serve in heaven, albeit with a fighting chance.
This is interesting and something I had not considered. If we had the TV ratings for Cal football 5-10 years prior to the Larry Scott media era we would get a clear picture of the level of interest for our games.
I’m also not convinced we would dominate if we were even to join the MWC because our revenue sports recruiting would take a massive hit were we no longer a P5 program. Cal’s not all of a sudden going to continue to recruit fringe P5 players/3*’s as members of the MWC, especially with the drastic reduction in revenue and catastrophic debt obligation.
It’s Power 5 or bust…praying ESPN can get the ACC deal done.
You are right. We would also need to cut most of the non revenue sports to get rid of what would become dead weight at that point. However, under this potential scenario we would have a massive edge on the academic side of things and perhaps the type of athlete that would consider us, (and that we could court) wouldn't have realistic hopes of making it to the league, so they would choose Cal over MWC schools. Let's just hope it doesn't come down to that.
I wonder how much they were impressed by the solid turnout of Cal fans at last year's game. It's funny that Cal has a reputation of disinterested fans yet we always have solid turnouts at major OOC games (tOSU, Texas, Notre Dame, Ole Miss, UNC)
Curious question here. Is it really Cal fans who turn out to these out of conference games, or is it alumni from these other schools? Reason I ask is that is one of the reasons Northwestern is still welcomed in the Big Ten despite Cal-like football program...Chicago is a big repository of alumni of other Big Ten schools who show up when their school comes to town
Berkelium: Don't believe any of that bullshit about disinterested fans at Cal. Some schools are going to make up any story to keep us out and avoid sharing revenue. Us joining the ACC is a win for ND but maybe not so much for other schools like UNC or Duke. God, I hope that Christ and Knowlton are going above and beyond and making the world's best pitch about why Cal belongs in and will enhance any conference that is willing to invite us (preferably the Big-10 or ACC).
How about some of the more knowledgeable folks, here, draft some talking points, consolidate them into a letter of W4C staff and members with our recommendations? Who knows it might give Christ and/or Knowlton some ideas to close the deal.
It would be funny as well if after all the take about Cal/Stanford “elitism” and culture fit we end up in a conference with Notre Dame, SMU, BC, and Wake Forest.
Getting the attention of the east coast media will be a shot in the arm for Cal. Great for recruiting as more eyeballs will be watching and cognizant of our elan. Rather than be relegated to the "out west" phenomenon we won't have talking heads at the networks taking potshots at us.
Furthermore it should improve our SoCal and Bay Area recruiting as we are in the national spotlight.
I remember an online conversation I witnessed when Duke BB was under the gun for athlete graduation rates or some similar issue. I believe Duke was due to play Wisconsin and a Duke fan was railing about Wisconsin just being a "state" school and how such a school is no academic match for Duke. So I looked up the number of Nobels associated with each school and Wisconsin had nearly as many as Duke. After I posted that fact, she never responded back.
There are two unsaid things maybe working against us:
1. The willful ignorance, as exampled above, about "state" schools.
Notre Dame's position in ENTIRELY about what is good for Notre Dame. Stanford being a member maintains the rivalry (and every other year west coast presence), and as a conference member, which the Irish must play a certain number of. it decreases the number of other ACC teams they must play, increasing the number of lucrative dates for other teams.
Cal would free up yet another ACC date obligation and get a west coast presence in the years they don't go to Stanford, and one they could pretty much count of winning, which is not the case with USC, who may well not maintain the rivalry, what with already more trips to the midwest.
And numbers means ACC inventory, increasing the chance it survives, and at a higher media valuation to Notre Dame, if the conference does have some defection.
You're not entirely wrong. The ENTIRE reason ND isn't in a football conference is because they see themselves as a National brand and haven't wanted to be constricted by becoming part of what have always been region-based conferences. The fact that they've been able to get a media contract as an independent that equals or exceeds the Big Ten and SEC demonstrates they are in fact a national brand.
That said, what does a national brand need to be successful as a national brand? High profile games in all the key regions of the country. So ND needs to play on the East Coast (hello Navy and BC), they need to play in the Midwest (hello Ohio State), they need to play in the South (Duke, NC State, Clemson and Wake Forest) and they need to play on the Pacific coast (USC and Stanford). Arguably there are only 6 (maybe only 4) West Coast programs that get them the national exposure needed to justify a network paying them on par with the Big Ten / SEC. Well, 4 of those 6 schools just left to join the Big Ten so it's to ND's advantage to make sure there are still schools out on the West Coast that can give them the media exposure they need to keep being a national brand.
Maybe they'll still be able to play a game a year against USC or one of the other soon-to-be Big 10 teams but I'm sure they'd feel better about their access to the West Coast media markets if Cal and Stanford were part of the ACC even if ND isn't for football
They need opponents that’s the angle, If the big 10 big 12 and SEC all move to 20 team leagues Notre Dame won’t have anybody to play because those conferences will likely just go to only conference schedules and not play nonconference opponents.
You're absolutely right. Notre Dame styles itself as a "national" brand...perhaps the only national brand in college football. And as I wrote in another comment, in order to be a national brand and justify the large tv contract that comes with it, they need to play in as many regions as possible. East Coast, South, Midwest and West Coast. Their problem is that arguably there are only 6 west coast brands that are attractive nationally and 4 of them have bolted for the Big Ten leaving the other 2 to be relegated to who-knows-where-land.
So if ND wants to have continued access to West Coast markets they need to ensure more West Coast brands stay alive.
Phil Knight is likely the only reason Oregon got in the Big Ten
I really hope this is true, because the irony of Cal being saved by Notre Dame after turning up our nose at SMU, TCU, and BYU because they are “religious schools” would just be too delicious of a story.
ND is paying it forward, Navy saved them during the 40’s that’s why they play Navy every year.
I thought it might be guilt for The Immaculate Encroachment. Also, I tend to think it is more Furd they are rooting for and we're the tag along/alsoran
If what you're saying is true, this is very short-sighted by the ACC. I can see some of the scrub teams in the ACC not being able to compete with Cal, but some of those games would be must watch tv!
ACC acting like the PAC-12 did in 2021. Biggest opponents to expansion were everyone who left.
Yup. Florida State and Clemson now.
#winCalForTheGiffer
If what you're saying is true, this is very short-sighted by the ACC period I can see some of the scrub teams in the ACC not being able to compete with cow, but. Some of those games would be muSr watch tv
ACC isn’t likely to happen, per reports. Looks like we’re out of any viable options. What a sad and avoidable situation. Don’t really know where the program goes from here, can’t even imagine how the players must feel right now. Knowlton and Christ (among many others) should feel ashamed and embarrassed.
For now. They haven't said it's over and they won't vote until they have the votes.
If we’re already facing an uphill battle, I have zero faith in Knowlton or Christ having the ability to flip votes in our favor. If ND and others tried and haven’t been successful, we’re cooked at this point.
That being said, nothing would make me happier than being proven wrong in this situation.
Honestly, I would have more faith in the Stanford people potentially flipping votes (along with Notre Dame and whoever their allies in the ACC are) than anyone from Cal. We are along for the ride here, thankfully tied to some powerful allies.
They should, but they won't. Christ is too busy with totally not being retired to lobby one or two more votes in our favor so a couple dozen programs will get cut. Truly a model in excellent leadership folks.
It's not clear this is about Cal. It could be about Notre Dame.
No vote has been given so this is still alive.
Agreed. This is more about beefs between the members. Doesn’t feel any better though.
This is the biggest problem. Our future lies with Carol focking Christ? We're doomed.
The BOR should step in and replace our leadership. It’s insane.
Touchdown Jesus, pray for us.
Looks like ACC ain’t happening. ESPN just reported ACC met tonight and Cal/Stanford move hit significant roadblocks and was always a long shot.
Most likely they don't have the votes yet. They might never have them but I wouldn't say it's over until they officially say they're closed to expansion.
100% correct. We'll hear all sorts of reports and leaks by parties with their own agendas. But nothing is over until we've either 1) been voted in or 2) have been told no. And we won't likely have an answer for (2) for a while since there are so many parties involved.
curse of the dynamic duo - Clueless and her sidekick Empty
On what platform did they report it?
https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/38164566/sources-cal-stanford-acc-hits-significant-roadblocks
https://twitter.com/TheAthletic/status/1689456525943681025
https://twitter.com/PeteThamel/status/1689453277094588416
Thanks for responding, I was hoping you wouldn't. (nothing against you.)
We screwed.
I believe Cal has about a dozen or so alums who are billionaires. If there were ever a time for one of them to pull a Phil Knight or T. Pickens and bankroll the program to give us some breathing room, its now.
Jaylen Brown!
If they haven't shown up yet, not sure they do.
If our options boil down to the MWC, a restructured PAC, or the ACC, I would lean towards the latter. Judging purely by TV ratings over the past 7 years, there seems to be limited interest in watching Cal take on low-profile opponents. Our most-watched conference games tend to be against USC, along with non-conference matches against Texas and Mississippi in 2016 and 2017. I believe this is because our fanbase becomes most energized by the prospect of upsetting high-profile teams. Opting for the ACC (or B1G) would open up opportunities to compete with marquee opponents. Among the remaining teams outside the power conferences, there wouldn't be the same level of excitement or interest at a time when we need strong viewership to secure favorable network deals in the upcoming media negotiations of the 2030s.
While our team's ultimate aspiration is always to strive for greatness, I think we merely need to maintain a level of competitiveness that gives us a decent chance, occasionally allowing us to upset teams we wouldn't normally expect to beat. This approach would lead to increased viewership and our survival, if not growth. I'm not convinced that joining the MWC or participating in the rebuilding of the PAC while dominating that league would significantly enhance our standing. The potential lack of visibility alone could relegate us to the realm of irrelevance.
John Milton once remarked, 'It is better to reign in Hell than to serve in Heaven.' However, in this scenario, I believe that for the Bears, it's preferable to serve in heaven, albeit with a fighting chance.
Our ratings are bad against poor competition because 75% of the alumni cannot or does not know how to watch the games. #ThanksLarry
This is interesting and something I had not considered. If we had the TV ratings for Cal football 5-10 years prior to the Larry Scott media era we would get a clear picture of the level of interest for our games.
The Mountain West is not a viable option. They likely shudder the entire department before they join the MWC.
Then we agree
Yes.
I’m also not convinced we would dominate if we were even to join the MWC because our revenue sports recruiting would take a massive hit were we no longer a P5 program. Cal’s not all of a sudden going to continue to recruit fringe P5 players/3*’s as members of the MWC, especially with the drastic reduction in revenue and catastrophic debt obligation.
It’s Power 5 or bust…praying ESPN can get the ACC deal done.
You are right. We would also need to cut most of the non revenue sports to get rid of what would become dead weight at that point. However, under this potential scenario we would have a massive edge on the academic side of things and perhaps the type of athlete that would consider us, (and that we could court) wouldn't have realistic hopes of making it to the league, so they would choose Cal over MWC schools. Let's just hope it doesn't come down to that.
“Human sacrifice! Cats and dogs living together! Mass hysteria!”
"Freshmen more Freshmen!"
Dear lord, baby Jesus, in your little golden domer diapers make this happen!
Jim Knowlton has never once woken up and pissed excellence…
I wonder how much they were impressed by the solid turnout of Cal fans at last year's game. It's funny that Cal has a reputation of disinterested fans yet we always have solid turnouts at major OOC games (tOSU, Texas, Notre Dame, Ole Miss, UNC)
Curious question here. Is it really Cal fans who turn out to these out of conference games, or is it alumni from these other schools? Reason I ask is that is one of the reasons Northwestern is still welcomed in the Big Ten despite Cal-like football program...Chicago is a big repository of alumni of other Big Ten schools who show up when their school comes to town
Berkelium: Don't believe any of that bullshit about disinterested fans at Cal. Some schools are going to make up any story to keep us out and avoid sharing revenue. Us joining the ACC is a win for ND but maybe not so much for other schools like UNC or Duke. God, I hope that Christ and Knowlton are going above and beyond and making the world's best pitch about why Cal belongs in and will enhance any conference that is willing to invite us (preferably the Big-10 or ACC).
How about some of the more knowledgeable folks, here, draft some talking points, consolidate them into a letter of W4C staff and members with our recommendations? Who knows it might give Christ and/or Knowlton some ideas to close the deal.
I have confidence beyond the shadow of a doubt that Knowlton and Christ are nothing more than loosely aware that realignment is happening.
It would be funny as well if after all the take about Cal/Stanford “elitism” and culture fit we end up in a conference with Notre Dame, SMU, BC, and Wake Forest.
Getting the attention of the east coast media will be a shot in the arm for Cal. Great for recruiting as more eyeballs will be watching and cognizant of our elan. Rather than be relegated to the "out west" phenomenon we won't have talking heads at the networks taking potshots at us.
Furthermore it should improve our SoCal and Bay Area recruiting as we are in the national spotlight.
Just an East Coast elitism note.
I remember an online conversation I witnessed when Duke BB was under the gun for athlete graduation rates or some similar issue. I believe Duke was due to play Wisconsin and a Duke fan was railing about Wisconsin just being a "state" school and how such a school is no academic match for Duke. So I looked up the number of Nobels associated with each school and Wisconsin had nearly as many as Duke. After I posted that fact, she never responded back.
There are two unsaid things maybe working against us:
1. The willful ignorance, as exampled above, about "state" schools.
2. The Cal versus Berkeley brand confusion.
-Steve
Cal State Berkeley alumnus 1980
Hopefully if Cal plays a in the ACC they’ll be better prepared for the time-zones and humidity out east.
I still remember a dehydrated Jahvid Best puking blue Gatorade on the field at that UMD game.
Let’s not get ahead of ourselves.
By the time conference play rolls around in late September and onwards, humidity is much less of an issue (except maybe in Tallahassee and Miami).
Notre Dame's position in ENTIRELY about what is good for Notre Dame. Stanford being a member maintains the rivalry (and every other year west coast presence), and as a conference member, which the Irish must play a certain number of. it decreases the number of other ACC teams they must play, increasing the number of lucrative dates for other teams.
Cal would free up yet another ACC date obligation and get a west coast presence in the years they don't go to Stanford, and one they could pretty much count of winning, which is not the case with USC, who may well not maintain the rivalry, what with already more trips to the midwest.
And numbers means ACC inventory, increasing the chance it survives, and at a higher media valuation to Notre Dame, if the conference does have some defection.
You're not entirely wrong. The ENTIRE reason ND isn't in a football conference is because they see themselves as a National brand and haven't wanted to be constricted by becoming part of what have always been region-based conferences. The fact that they've been able to get a media contract as an independent that equals or exceeds the Big Ten and SEC demonstrates they are in fact a national brand.
That said, what does a national brand need to be successful as a national brand? High profile games in all the key regions of the country. So ND needs to play on the East Coast (hello Navy and BC), they need to play in the Midwest (hello Ohio State), they need to play in the South (Duke, NC State, Clemson and Wake Forest) and they need to play on the Pacific coast (USC and Stanford). Arguably there are only 6 (maybe only 4) West Coast programs that get them the national exposure needed to justify a network paying them on par with the Big Ten / SEC. Well, 4 of those 6 schools just left to join the Big Ten so it's to ND's advantage to make sure there are still schools out on the West Coast that can give them the media exposure they need to keep being a national brand.
Maybe they'll still be able to play a game a year against USC or one of the other soon-to-be Big 10 teams but I'm sure they'd feel better about their access to the West Coast media markets if Cal and Stanford were part of the ACC even if ND isn't for football
It's not like other schools are altruistic and make their moves based on the greater good.
The move can be all about what's best for ND because it happens to match what is good for us.
Right, both those statements can be true at the same time.
I was trying to figure out what Notre Dame's angle was. Good insight.
They need opponents that’s the angle, If the big 10 big 12 and SEC all move to 20 team leagues Notre Dame won’t have anybody to play because those conferences will likely just go to only conference schedules and not play nonconference opponents.
You're absolutely right. Notre Dame styles itself as a "national" brand...perhaps the only national brand in college football. And as I wrote in another comment, in order to be a national brand and justify the large tv contract that comes with it, they need to play in as many regions as possible. East Coast, South, Midwest and West Coast. Their problem is that arguably there are only 6 west coast brands that are attractive nationally and 4 of them have bolted for the Big Ten leaving the other 2 to be relegated to who-knows-where-land.
So if ND wants to have continued access to West Coast markets they need to ensure more West Coast brands stay alive.
It's fine that they're thinking about themselves. You find allies when interests align.
If what's good for them is good for us that works for me. I'd expect them to look after their own interests, just as we do.
So, like, we are Rudy now?
Only taller.
No Cal is Robbie.