23 Comments
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
azlefty's avatar

I wonder if Cal and Stanford maybe should have stayed with Oregon state and Wazzu and focused on being prominent in a merged Pac-4/Mountain West conference. It's always been such a struggle and a constant series of disappointment in the Pac 12. Cal hasn't exactly been dominant against Mountain west opponents and even these Division II games are often not a given. The ACC with the likes of Clemson may be another opportunity to be the doormat. Maybe that's why they were accepted?

Expand full comment
Strut’88's avatar

The ACC actually has more teams Cal can beat on a regular basis than the PAC-12 has had in recent years, in my opinion. For instance Virginia, Boston College, Wake Forest, GA Tech and others have not struck fear in opponents for a while now, and Duke’s success this year is very unusual. Depending on how the schedule lines up, I could see Cal going .500 next year in conference.

Expand full comment
GoldenSD81's avatar

Yeah, Duke made a great hire with Elko and looks to be on the rise, I doubt Wilcox could beat Duke because Elko would coach circles around him. That said, Syracuse, Louisville, and NC State and all the schools you mentioned are all very beatable.

Expand full comment
Steve W's avatar

Just a reminder that Wilcox gladly scooped up FInley after Finley realized he was not going to crack the two-deep at NC State during Spring Ball. So NC State is beatable, yet they told Finley he would be twirling cardboard plays on the sideline had he stayed. Just puts things into perspective given that a lot of Cal fans are clamoring for Finley to start over Jackson. And Jackson would be twirling those same signs had he stayed at TCU......Sigh.

Expand full comment
Strut’88's avatar

And, figuring in one additional winnable home non-conference game, Cal could very conceivably go 7-5 next year, whereas in the pre-dissolved PAC-12 that would be a much taller order.

Expand full comment
Justbear's avatar

FYI FCS is Div 1

Expand full comment
O.Overall's avatar

Oh god no, would have been economic suicide. ACC is not as good as you are thinking. P12 this year is easily better

Expand full comment
azlefty's avatar

With the Apple plus minus option that was presented, I agree. But there are a lot of sports TV channels and the number of future streaming channels is essentially limitless, so there must be a market for even mediocre college football content in the Saturday night "after dark" time slot, after the 2 home games a week among the USC/UCLA/Oregon/Washington traitors.

Anyway, that ship has sailed and a deal's a deal. My thoughts are really just academic at this point.

Expand full comment
O.Overall's avatar

Yeah I feel you that there was likely a more creative deal out there after the SoCal traitors bolted for the Midwest, but unfortunately our conference leadership kind of shat the bed and then when the Ducks and Huskies left, the jig was up

Expand full comment
GoldenSD81's avatar

I don’t think the ACC is full of dominant programs. Clemson seems to be regressing due to a number of reasons (losing coordinators, not embracing NIL/portal, recruits not living up to their potential) and most programs outside of Miami and FSU have similar talent and are just as inconsistent as Cal. I figure most years we will play 1 of the big 3 (Miami, FSU, Clemson) so as long as we can manage the travel, I like our odds against Georgia Tech, Wake Forest, BC, Virginia, Va Tech, etc.

Expand full comment
azlefty's avatar

I guess it's impossible for the entire conference to be dominant, given that football, like all sports, is a zero-sum game. Even in the SEC, every conference game that Georgia or Alabama wins has a loser.

Expand full comment
GoldenSD81's avatar

Yes but that is why we should have went to an 8 game conference schedule. The SEC has an 8 game schedule, which means everyone has one fewer loss at the end of the season and one really good team doesn’t have to lose to Bama or Georgia so it helps with their rankings.

Expand full comment
Jimmy Chitwood's avatar

Agreed, typical PAC 12 incompetence, shooting itself in the foot.

Expand full comment
Strut’88's avatar

Also, the ACC plays an 8-game conference slate, which would help with Cal’s travel burden. What I think is ludicrous (though I would be fine if Cal could schedule this way, given the other huge disadvantages they’ll face logistically) is the following: top teams in these other power conferences (SEC, ACC) will sometimes have eight home games and four away games in a season.

Expand full comment
GoldenSD81's avatar

I couldn’t remember if the ACC has an 8 game conference schedule. This is a good thing for us.

Assuming we play Stanford and SMU every season, they only leaves 6 more ACC conference games to schedule, 3 of those would be at Memorial and 3 would be on the east coast, so travel won’t be that bad for us. I would like to see us have an early season ACC game within the first 3 weeks as that would help spread out the east coast travel.

Expand full comment
Strut’88's avatar

Yeah, that would be nice, in most seasons. But, we’re already traveling to Auburn in the first week of September 2024.

Expand full comment
KetamineCal's avatar

PAC/MWC would be a massive pay cut. Full share would probably end up being around same as our 30% ACC share (but our ACC share is temporary and has other non-pro-rated incentives). We're also a pretty elite P5 athletic program overall if you take into account ALL sports, though we've sucked at the two major ones. We also represented a way for the ACC to get some $$$ to placate their top programs.

It's just a marriage of convenience for money. Plus, the ACC has plenty of 3-5 win teams (or worse) so it would probably be a lateral talent transfer or maybe even a touch easier to avoid doormat (if we get some financial help during the 30% years).

Expand full comment
LABear1983's avatar

Overall agreed. BUT, I really wish they could've stayed and salvaged the PAC. Yes, the immediate media rights would've been less (maybe 7-10 mil?), but with a merged PAC/MW, we could've shared in the residual PAC assets of 40 mil? and incoming NCAA and bowl payouts, closed a short 2-3 year deal, and then shopped for a better deal after the newly merged PAC had had time to reestablish itself with the stronghold of West coast schools.

Expand full comment
Stanfurdstinks's avatar

Also a way for Cal to potentially raise the visibility of its basketball program (given we are on the right track now). Make Cal a power MBB and you don't have to rely on just football success.

Expand full comment
Jimmy Chitwood's avatar

Yes, this. I donated more than I could afford to CALegends after Madsen was hired.

Expand full comment
KetamineCal's avatar

I have a ton of faith in Madsen and, man, the ACC hoops experience sells itself. Just added trips to Cameron and the Dean Dome as well as Duke and UNC at Haas to my bucket list.

Expand full comment
GoldenSD81's avatar

Same and completely agree. I am so hyped for men’s basketball and Madsen.

Expand full comment
Jimmy Chitwood's avatar

We’re doing Thanksgiving at Sis Chitwood’s house in Rancho Penasquitos with her 47 children… see you in San Juan Capistrano for the Wed/Sat games. Let’s meet up.

Expand full comment