BCS leagues expanding - yeah?

And Cal's is retiring after the spring term.

 

This is a great point.
Of the 26 institutions in the 2023-24 Pac 12 and Big Ten, 15 are led by CEOs in their first or second year on the job; interim appointees; or lame ducks. One of those in the interim category, Ohio State, doesn't have a president at all. The Trustees have declined to name an acting president. The chair of the BoT is nominally in charge.
The breakdown is 6 of 12 in the current Pac 12 and 9 of 14 in the current Big Ten.
When you have that degree of experience or investment or whatever you want to call it, the conference commissioner has greater authority to get his way. There's nobody to deliver pushback.

 

Tennessee's decade-plus abyss was caused in great part by a revolving door of presidents and chancellors and athletic directors.

 

With all the resumes flying out of Pac-12 headquarters these days, I wonder if anyone is bothering to do some massive edits to the conference promo ad they run during every game. Man, those spots will be hilarious.

Their latest.

Pac-12 Conference TV Spot, 'Tradition'
Pac-12 Conference TV Spot, 'Complicated Times'

 

I think that one key point largely unremarked upon is that Washington and Oregon moved to the Big 10 even though the schools will receive about half the television money of the other members. I think this is going to create a precedent. When conference television deals come up in the future the schools in larger media markets will demand larger cuts. We are seeing this in the ACC where Florida State wants a much bigger share.

 

If I was involved in those discussions, I'd do equal base shares, and then extra portions for those schoolsl that are the biggest draws on TV, conference champions, runners-up, etc. You could rig it so the FSUs of the world would always get a bigger slice, but at least make it objective with criteria. And say $10k to the team with the best GPA.

 

That’s already happened in one of the conference expansion rounds, I forget which.

And Florida State is among the top revenue receivers in the ACC, with their base share plus incentives for the tournaments, etc.

 

This guy is trying to make something happen. The implication that there's some drama here strikes me as bogus.
I suspect -- but can't prove -- that the real number of No votes is greater than four. The four have been willing to have it known that they're opposed; in so doing, they're sort of taking one for the club. This way, the other 11 can claim or imply that Stanford and UC Berkeley, two outstanding academic institutions with championship sports programs, were strongly considered but -- dang it -- came up just one vote short. They had support from 73% of the membership.
That makes it look like a mild, benign rejection rather than the stinging rebuke that would be inferred from six or more dissenting voices.
UNC and NC State form one bloc of two because they're part of the UNC System. FSU and Clemson are football first, football second, football third and football last, and they're going to be obstructionists under any circumstances because they aspire to break the whole thing up one day. (They'd vote no on anybody.)
I have to believe, for example, that Virginia and Va Tech both oppose the inclusion of two California schools because of travel logistics. But we won't hear that because nobody wants to be guilty of piling on.

 

“This guy” is a reporter. He’s reporting.

And what championships has Cal won that anybody cares about?

The two States should run to the Mountain West and leave Cal and Stanford dangling.

 

ACC presidents meeting today, and a Cal "insider" is saying UNC and NC State are on board with accepting Cal and Stanford.

 

Considering how much the non-revenue sports will be impacted by travel and the smaller media rights - I think this is insane.