College Football--Big Ten Expansion

[Anonymous]

FSU can't give notice next Tuesday now. If they do, the other schools will change votes and admit Cal, Stanford, SMU. You can't leave and block the future. So if this holds, the ACC stays together.

Also -- if FSU does not give notice, I think we have the final verdict of the GOR. If there was any real (other than Hail Mary) way to get out of the GOR, FSU would leave.

Big10 may want UNC. They would be a great fit. But now way the political people allow UNC to go and leave NC State to fall to a minor conference. As people put the lists together of ACC target schools know that UNC can't move unless NC State comes along.

I still think Clemson can be flipped. If they are the the deal goes through. Clemson president will be under pressure to do this. This is not a football or even AD decision. It is president and board level. This is where I would push.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An internet sports writer suggested that Notre Dame's motive for pushing hard to get Stanford into the ACC is an attempt to preserve Notre Dame's strength of schedule by getting Stanford into a Power 4 Conference. Strength of schedule is a factor used by college rankings services which is important for getting into the 12 team college football playoff.

I am not sure how Stanford helps strength of schedule given how mediocre it has been for the last several years, and it will be worse for them without the PAC12 portion any longer.

Someone has it hard to get Stanford into the B1G...I get it, but what is in it for the B1G? Their secondary sports would all fall to Stanford every year and their football team and alumni base adds nothing to the B1g (it is so relatively small even compared to Northwestern)

They add academic value and a potential lure for ND.

(OP here)

Agree. Stanford adds academic prestige, research prestige, is a wealthy school, the San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose media market and can legitimately but the top recruits under NIL. Plus, adding Stanford to the Big Ten Conference makes the entire West Coast Big Ten country for viewership and for recruiting.

Absolutely. In addition, there are also many Big Ten alumni in the area. The need to have 6 teams on the west coast will also push the B1G to take Berkeley as well. Don’t kid yourselves either, most Big Ten presidents want the academic prestige of Berkeley in the conference. The conference really prides itself on having great academic schools (save Nebraska).

Love your post, but wonder about Cal's athletic department debt which is approaching half ($500,000,000) a billion dollars.

I assume they will have to work that out by themselves. Perhaps it’s a new stronger conference affiliation, the alumni/partisans will contribute more to getting things back on track.

Cal has no real alumni base that would support this. There is really no way out of this for Cal as opposed to UCLA.

[Anonymous]

Why does Cal even do D1 sports if any sort? When I hear Berkely, the absolute last thing I think of is their sports team. Can’t they just give up and move to D3?

[Anonymous]

No conference wants a school in as much financial distress as is Cal-Berkeley.

Both Big Ten & SEC want UNC according to many reports--which could be wrong.

[Anonymous]

A wild idea:

UCal-Berkeley has access to two endowments which are both worth billions of dollars. Pay off the $450 million of UCal-Berkeley athletic department debt and proceed from there. Yes, I now that most of the endowment funds are restricted, but certainly a bit less than a half billion can be used out of $20 billion or so of UC endowment funds.

Then, if a UC-Berkeley undergraduate education is as good as UC-B supporters claim, then just charge an appropriate amount of tuition to run a balanced budget each year. Oh, but I forgot, this is California where everything is free.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A wild idea:

UCal-Berkeley has access to two endowments which are both worth billions of dollars. Pay off the $450 million of UCal-Berkeley athletic department debt and proceed from there. Yes, I now that most of the endowment funds are restricted, but certainly a bit less than a half billion can be used out of $20 billion or so of UC endowment funds.

Then, if a UC-Berkeley undergraduate education is as good as UC-B supporters claim, then just charge an appropriate amount of tuition to run a balanced budget each year. Oh, but I forgot, this is California where everything is free.

The endowment is for all people of the UC schools; do you think UCSB is going to agree to Berkeley just grabbing a half billion for stadium debt?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A wild idea:

UCal-Berkeley has access to two endowments which are both worth billions of dollars. Pay off the $450 million of UCal-Berkeley athletic department debt and proceed from there. Yes, I now that most of the endowment funds are restricted, but certainly a bit less than a half billion can be used out of $20 billion or so of UC endowment funds.

Then, if a UC-Berkeley undergraduate education is as good as UC-B supporters claim, then just charge an appropriate amount of tuition to run a balanced budget each year. Oh, but I forgot, this is California where everything is free.

The endowment is for all people of the UC schools; do you think UCSB is going to agree to Berkeley just grabbing a half billion for stadium debt?

Yes. There are two endowments. UCal-Berkeley has a separate endowment of about $2.7 billion; the UC system (Board of regents) endowment is at $17.4 billion. UC needs to learn basic math skills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A wild idea:

UCal-Berkeley has access to two endowments which are both worth billions of dollars. Pay off the $450 million of UCal-Berkeley athletic department debt and proceed from there. Yes, I now that most of the endowment funds are restricted, but certainly a bit less than a half billion can be used out of $20 billion or so of UC endowment funds.

Then, if a UC-Berkeley undergraduate education is as good as UC-B supporters claim, then just charge an appropriate amount of tuition to run a balanced budget each year. Oh, but I forgot, this is California where everything is free.

The endowment is for all people of the UC schools; do you think UCSB is going to agree to Berkeley just grabbing a half billion for stadium debt?

Yes. There are two endowments. UCal-Berkeley has a separate endowment of about $2.7 billion; the UC system (Board of regents) endowment is at $17.4 billion. UC needs to learn basic math skills.

Cal specific endowment is pitiful for being the historically best public in one of the richest states in the country in a hyper wealthy region

Why is it so low?

[Anonymous]

Better if UC-Berkeley would just charge California residents an appropriate amount for tuition & fees to enable the school to pay its debts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A wild idea:

UCal-Berkeley has access to two endowments which are both worth billions of dollars. Pay off the $450 million of UCal-Berkeley athletic department debt and proceed from there. Yes, I now that most of the endowment funds are restricted, but certainly a bit less than a half billion can be used out of $20 billion or so of UC endowment funds.

Then, if a UC-Berkeley undergraduate education is as good as UC-B supporters claim, then just charge an appropriate amount of tuition to run a balanced budget each year. Oh, but I forgot, this is California where everything is free.

The endowment is for all people of the UC schools; do you think UCSB is going to agree to Berkeley just grabbing a half billion for stadium debt?

Yes. There are two endowments. UCal-Berkeley has a separate endowment of about $2.7 billion; the UC system (Board of regents) endowment is at $17.4 billion. UC needs to learn basic math skills.

Cal specific endowment is pitiful for being the historically best public in one of the richest states in the country in a hyper wealthy region

Why is it so low?


Because California strongly supported their state schools. Fundraising was not as needed like at UMich.

[Anonymous]

Not so sure about the Big Ten really being interested in UNC. I think 20 years of uninterrupted academic improprieties might have something to do with it.

[Anonymous]

Another wild idea:

Just put Stanford & Cal's athletic conference affiliation up for auction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not so sure about the Big Ten really being interested in UNC. I think 20 years of uninterrupted academic improprieties might have something to do with it.

I know UMD wasn’t happy about it. Gary Williams having to suspend players and some failed out. The WAPO lambasted Williams and UMD for not having a high graduation rate in sports and why couldn’t they raise it up to unc levels. Turns out unc was graduating illiterates for decades.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think only FSU is safe. All the other ACC teams may be stuck which they all are anyway until 2036. Uva and Unc have small alumni numbers, poor tv ratings and state political issues with larger schools in the same state. They definitely have less value than Stanford and the San Francisco/ No Cal market. Clemson splits a small state and has low alumni numbers. Maryland was the only school that is a solitary flagship in its state, inside the beltway of a huge media market and has huge alumni numbers. All the other schools besides FSU ( not the only school but an enormous state/population and large alumni numbers ) have issues.

UNC is coveted by the Big Ten Conference as it gets the Big Ten into new recruiting territory, solid athletic department, excellent academics, and same viewership for football as Stanford, but much more popular in basketball.

Only a few insiders really know the Big Ten Conference's target schools in the ACC if the ACC breaks up. Possible ACC target schools include UNC, U Miami, FSU, Georgia Tech, & Virginia.

UNC may be coveted by the Big Ten presidents but you have to keep in mind that FOX and ESPN are paying the bills for these conferences. FOX pays the bills for the BIG and wants to get into the southeast and wants football. FSU will get an invite before UNC.

ESPN is handcuffed because of their financial problems. They do not want to lose the ACC or the west coast entirely. They also do not want ND in the BIG. ND wants more money and independence. This is why ESPN and ND are trying to pair Cal and Stanford with the ACC, possibly even with SMU and/or even NAVY. ND may even commit to more games in the ACC.

However, it is not going to be enough.

The GOR is not iron clad. It will be messy and expensive. FSU and others may not declare by August 15th but that will only be because they are getting a war chest together and to build legislative support for sovereign immunity legislation, etc.....

The critical date is to do it by 2026 when the football playoffs will be renegotiated and the money gap between the ACC and BIG/SEC grows substantially. It may even be beneficial to stay in the ACC for a couple of more years as it is a much easier path to the playoff.

Basketball does matter but not as much as football. Once football is resolved they will turn their attention to taking basketball out of the hands of the NCAA. Why let the NCAA control and keep all that money?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think only FSU is safe. All the other ACC teams may be stuck which they all are anyway until 2036. Uva and Unc have small alumni numbers, poor tv ratings and state political issues with larger schools in the same state. They definitely have less value than Stanford and the San Francisco/ No Cal market. Clemson splits a small state and has low alumni numbers. Maryland was the only school that is a solitary flagship in its state, inside the beltway of a huge media market and has huge alumni numbers. All the other schools besides FSU ( not the only school but an enormous state/population and large alumni numbers ) have issues.

UNC is coveted by the Big Ten Conference as it gets the Big Ten into new recruiting territory, solid athletic department, excellent academics, and same viewership for football as Stanford, but much more popular in basketball.

Only a few insiders really know the Big Ten Conference's target schools in the ACC if the ACC breaks up. Possible ACC target schools include UNC, U Miami, FSU, Georgia Tech, & Virginia.

UNC may be coveted by the Big Ten presidents but you have to keep in mind that FOX and ESPN are paying the bills for these conferences. FOX pays the bills for the BIG and wants to get into the southeast and wants football. FSU will get an invite before UNC.

ESPN is handcuffed because of their financial problems. They do not want to lose the ACC or the west coast entirely. They also do not want ND in the BIG. ND wants more money and independence. This is why ESPN and ND are trying to pair Cal and Stanford with the ACC, possibly even with SMU and/or even NAVY. ND may even commit to more games in the ACC.

However, it is not going to be enough.

The GOR is not iron clad. It will be messy and expensive. FSU and others may not declare by August 15th but that will only be because they are getting a war chest together and to build legislative support for sovereign immunity legislation, etc.....

The critical date is to do it by 2026 when the football playoffs will be renegotiated and the money gap between the ACC and BIG/SEC grows substantially. It may even be beneficial to stay in the ACC for a couple of more years as it is a much easier path to the playoff.

Basketball does matter but not as much as football. Once football is resolved they will turn their attention to taking basketball out of the hands of the NCAA. Why let the NCAA control and keep all that money?

Fun fact

B1G schools just passed the acc in ncaa basketball nattys 23 to 17