BCS leagues expanding - yeah?

It's not my responsibility to care about those sports. It's the schools' responsibility. They're in loco parentis, not me. If they don't care, and they don't, then the athletes in those sports and their parents and their fellow students ought to take any actions they see fit. Has anybody asked the student bodies of the Pac-12 defectors what they think? Obviously not, they're not on fucking campus yet.

 

I'd bet Aresco tries anyhow. Coming from C-USA, it's refreshing to have a commish who actually does something. Judy MacLeod is inert.

 

Cal and Stanford should try independent before going MWC. Washington State and Oregon State should run to the MWC. I don't see a better option for them.

 

Hard to be in loco parentis for adults.

 

I'm here in place of Charlie's parents. - Excuse me ? - In loco parentis. They could not make the trip from Oregon today.

 

Stanford has plenty of money. Cal athletics is $400M in debt. Neither draws big crowds except when they play each other. Neither isw especially good in men's basketball. Going independent, with no conference media rights money, would be a complete financial disaster.

 

They don't have to be independent across the board. Stick the other sports in the MWC, Big West, WCC, wherever the fuck you want. MWC pays about $4 million in media rights, so that's going to do zero for their debt and unlike Stanford, once Cal drops down they aren't coming back. Whatever Stanford does, they Cal better lock arms and do with them because expansion and realignment aren't going to stop today. That means that have to risk it by going independent for a bit or see if the remaining Pac-12 schools can piece together another conference.

I think eventually the ACC (Or maybe Big XII) will grab them. The ACC is keeping them on the line until August 15 because if FSU/Clemson announces they are going to leave after 2024 that's the deadline. If not then it's 2026.

 

You still have to pay bills. Without a TV contract, Cal has no real athletic income.

 

I'd be willing to bet the number of FCS football programs that actually generate a profit for the school is far below what most people think. The big timers obviously do, but just because your team is D1 doesn't mean it's a cash cow.
The number of D1 men's basketball teams that make money is far below that, and the number of women's teams that don't operate at a loss could probably be counted on your fingers.

 

I think Cal needs to sit down and take an honest look at their athletic department and the constituencies it serves. At most schools ninety percent of the focus is the football program. Nine per cent of the interest is in the basketball programs and one per cent all the other sports. At Cal ethe sports outside of football and basketball generate a lot of alumni interest. The football team seems to generate far less interest than at other schools.

Cal would lose a lot of television money if it moved to the Mountain West. But the school would save a lot of money because the expenses of operating in the Mountain West are lower. A ex-Pac 12 coach like Justin Wilcox is making 4.75 million dollars a year. A Mountain West head football coach makes in the low seven figures. The Mountain West also offers much easier travel.

No one is attending Cal football games now. I suspect the school could still schedule a game with Stanford annually. Attendance might even improve in the MWC. Cal will be a bottom feeder in any Power Five conference but should be more competitive in the MWC.

 

I agree totally with your point and frankly I think Cal needs to seriously examine walking away from college football altogether. But they won't do it because of the massive debt they took out to remodel the football stadium and the then-false revenue assumptions they made at the time they took out the debt.

Basically, they need that football revenue for debt service. Only they're going to have a real hard time getting it now. Seems to me it's time to bite the bullet and deal with that bad debt rather than continuing to chase non-existent revenue and digging the hole deeper, but they won't.

 

I've been trying to think about this through the SEC's lens and priorities since they're the ones with the same TV partner as the ACC. Right now (always) they're thinking about how to monopolize CFP money and likely fantasizing about expanded playoffs, and I think that's the logic behind what's happening with the ACC teams. If having FSU and Clemson in the SEC helps the cause of playoff expansion, then they're targets. If leaving them in the ACC helps the cause of playoff expansion, then they need to stay in the ACC for the good of the SEC.

Has it been reported exactly how many teams it takes to break the ACC grant of rights? Is it a bare majority, a super-majority, something else? ESPN and Fox could surely assemble some sort of grand bargain to find new homes for 8 teams, especially if one of those teams was Notre Dame. But ND has a vested interest in keeping the status quo of independent football with ACC for everything else, so I imagine they would oppose any deal that threatened the grant of rights.