sactowndog

On 3/29/2024 at 4:45 PM, Headbutt said:

As I said to Natty earlier, you outsiders who were part of building this conference, and still maintain an interest in our direction and welfare are more than welcome on this board IMO.  All who behave like adults are welcome actually.  Even when you disagree with the status quo.

our geographic/population footprint is pretty small.   Adding Montana isn’t going to help but the Cougs are the 2nd team in the 13th largest state with a 7.8M population.  To put that in context, that is more people than Wyoming, Hawaii, Idaho and New Mexico combined.   

When it comes to negotiating TV deals they matter a lot.  

On 1/3/2024 at 2:40 PM, Bruininthebay said:

Dog - you are generally in touch with Northern California even if I don't agree with your take but if you compare the situations of Stanford versus Cal I don't agree that Cal is the Bay Area university with the biggest challenges to having a successful football team going forward.

Yes, Cal has been bad for a long time but that is primarily because the pro sports teams moved to Oakland as they saw Cal athletics doing very well from the teens through early 60s.  Now with the A's leaving Oakland,  Cal has a huge ability to grow in the East Bay and become the top ticket for athletics in the East Bay (as well as being easier to drive to from the North Bay or the Central Valley).

Stanford used to be the premier athletic ticket in the South Bay and there was no competition from MLB, the NFL, or the NBA.  While the Sharks and Earthquakes had some effect, the 49ers moving to Santa Clara had a significant affect on Stanford before NIL happened.

Stanford also has a unique brand - to a casual fan they are a great opponent but they don't really inspire fans without a direct connection to the institution.  If Stanford football or basketball is good then causal Northern California fans will watch their games but most of these fans want to see Stanford lose rather than Stanford win.

In kayfabe terms, Stanford works heel. 

Fair points though I think the problem of inspiring fans is true for Cal and Stanford.  Both schools are elite enough that the average fan has zero connection to them.  For most of the conservative valley Cal is downright hated.  

Cal used to be on the premier radio stations up and down the valley.  My dad at one time listened to them in Hanford.  That just no longer is the case as Fresno has the top local radio station from Stockton to Bakersfield.  

Sacramento where I live is no man’s land for college football. High School football is bigger.  Cal just has very little penetration here.  Because the valley is really 49ers and High School their total addressable market is really just the 6M Bay Area. 

In Stanford’s case they are rich enough they can pretty much buy whatever they want.  Cal is wealthy but not that wealthy.  Neither school has an alumni base that into sports compared to USC or even UCLA.   

On 12/29/2023 at 5:37 PM, Headbutt said:

Maybe.  Who knows.  I question that though.  They certainly didn't take a step up from that by buying their way into a turbulent ACC on the other end of the country, so that makes me doubtful but who knows.

Stanford is very particular about with whom they share a conference.  Texas Tech and K State is a lot like sharing with Fresno which Stanford will never do.  That doesn’t even include problematic schools like BYU and Baylor.  
 

ACC has higher academic schools: Duke, Pitt, Georgia Tech, UNC, UVA, Notre Dame.  All top tier institutions.  

if the big state school’s like FSU, UVA, UNC, all leave I could see the other elites forming a national Magnolia Conference:

Duke, BC, Pitt, G-Tech, Notre Dame, Syracuse, Wake Forest, Army?, Tulane, Rice, SMU, Miami, Stanford, Cal, Air Force?, Navy?, 

On 12/29/2023 at 12:59 PM, Headbutt said:

I think everybody's in trouble, but that's another discussion.  You're right about the power and influence of Stanford, yet they apparently didn't get invites from the B1G, SEC, B12, or even the ACC until they forced their way in the door.  Unless they create a two team coalition with ND to force their way into something, I think there's a really good chance they end up indy or G5.  They just don't fit in with the new semi-pro model that everyone is predicting.

They certainly didn’t get an into the BIG.  I think they had an offer to the Big12 according to Sheerer.  

On 12/29/2023 at 12:37 PM, Wyobraska said:

Is Stanford one of the schools who don't want to play the game long term though?

Good question.  They may not be.   They may not be alone either.  

On 12/28/2023 at 11:14 PM, Headbutt said:

We'll see.  You may be right.  After all there is a good chance that IF the ACC blows up and all this splitting into division stuff happens, that those two may join SDSU at the G5 level.

I don’t get the extent that everyone discounts Stanford.   At the end of the day Stanford will be somewhere.  They have too much power and influence to not be and the Bay Area is too big of a market.  

I think Cal could be on some trouble but not Stanford. 

On 12/26/2023 at 4:34 PM, sactowndog said:

Jason Scheer reported the Big 12 wanted Stanford but not Cal.  

@RSF you can laugh but he was much more on top of realignment and what was happening than most of the national writers.   Canzano and Wilner took multiple shots at him and he proved to be much more accurate about what was happening.  

On 12/26/2023 at 4:00 PM, ---I GREEN INFECTION I--- said:

 

 

A State has a “metro” area?

If you are talking about the school “Arizona,” their is ZERO chance Tucson is the 10th metro area.

 

Yeah well I got his point about Phoenix and don’t really think the gotcha game is productive.  

On 12/26/2023 at 2:13 PM, RSF said:

From where?  Even the SF Chronicle reported that Calford reached out to the Big 12, rather than the other way around.

 

https://frontofficesports.com/newsletter/are-stanford-cal-eyeing-big-12/

 

According to a recent report in the San Francisco Chronicle, Cal and Stanford have already begun exploring the possibility of joining the Big 12 in the event that joining the ACC doesn’t work out. It is unclear what steps the schools have taken in relation to a potential Big 12 move.

Despite the reported new efforts, the Big 12 may not even be interested in the two universities. The Action Network reported the conference has not had conversations with any of the remaining Pac-12 schools and has no intention in engaging with those schools.

 

Earlier this month, Big 12 commissioner Brett Yorkmark said the conference was done expanding “right now” and was happy to have 16 teams for the 2024 season.

 

 

Jason Scheer reported the Big 12 wanted Stanford but not Cal.  

On 12/26/2023 at 6:24 AM, RSF said:

No.  Stanford was not invited.  The 4 corners were always the target.  After them there was no more money.

 

 

I heard otherwise 

On 12/25/2023 at 2:47 PM, RSF said:

Because teams go towards the money not away from it.

 

And if such conversations were taking place Utah and the AZ schools wouldn't have left in the 1st place.  Also, see point #1.

Except Stanford could have joined the Big-12 and chose not to.  

On 12/24/2023 at 4:38 PM, SalinasSpartan said:

I made this point when the Pac fell apart, but one of the big issues with the ACC is that whatever the B1G and SEC cap themselves at, the Big 12 will absolutely follow their lead and gobble up most of whoever is left in the ACC. That means that literally at least half of the ACC will be fine if it implodes, and if the P2 go to 22, then damn near the whole league will be fine. And why 22? Well that gets the top 3 conferences to 66 schools, maybe 67 if ND is still Indy. Just so happens to be right around the number often cited when talking about the power teams breaking away. 
 

So, where is the incentive for most of the ACC to wait around patiently for a decade to resolve this? 

What makes you so sure the more academically prestigious schools of the ACC won’t take the stronger academic schools in the Big 12? 
 

My guess is Cal and Stanford are talking to Utah and the AZ schools now about forming a national academically prestigious conference as we speak.  

On 12/25/2023 at 7:15 AM, RebelAlliance said:

Well, you got the Arizona metro size wrong too.  They're 10th.

You are correct but I don’t think the difference invalidates the main point. 

On 12/24/2023 at 11:29 AM, RebelAlliance said:

Arizona isn't even top 10.

California	38,965,193	250.0
Texas	30,503,301	116.8
Florida	22,610,726	421.4
New York	19,571,216	415.3
Pennsylvania	12,961,683	289.7
Illinois	12,549,689	226.1
Ohio	11,785,935	288.5
Georgia	11,029,227	191.1
North Carolina	10,835,491	222.8
Michigan	10,037,261	177.3

 

Yeah I meant to type 14 but missed the 1 in front of the 4

On 12/24/2023 at 9:51 AM, CowboyFriar said:

Then why aren't they in either of those conferences?

Because they want to do things in stages and Virginia, North Carolina and Florida State are all higher priority.  As is ND depending on what they do.  It also isn’t clear UA or ASU. One but not both will go.   

Arizona is the 14th largest state in the country with 7M people and tons of snow birds.  Arizona State being named AAU is a big deal. Phoenix is the 7th largest Metro area.  An Arizona school could fit in either 

On 12/23/2023 at 5:24 PM, Spaztecs said:

Hasn't the old Big 12 fat been picked off the bone ?

Name one XII School that the B1G or $EC would want ?

Utah, AZ State and Colorado.  

On 12/20/2023 at 2:48 PM, alum93 said:

As Stanford and Cal showed, everything is about football when it comes to P4 and conference realignment.  WSU and OSU are going to make decisions for football first and foremost.  I doubt the strength of WCC was a big factor at all.  Still, i am surprised by the move.  And no baseball too.  

We aren’t hugely better in basketball and the WCC is better in many other sports.  

On 11/1/2023 at 12:14 PM, Billings said:

Problem is Tulane and Memphis are waiting for the ACC mess.  NO way they come west or stay in the AAC when that pops. There will be no new conferences formed period.  Everything has to be pulled off with the number we have and probably only 9 conferences to fit everyone in.

 

BTW you have to have 8 full member schools to be considered a FBS conference

The western half and Eastern half.  It’s a 12-14 or 16 team conference that would lock down the play off bid every year 

On 11/1/2023 at 11:26 AM, Brew_Poke said:

At least we buy more than 3 tickets to our bowl games.

Fresno travels pretty well as well.  

I don’t know where you get the impression I am anti-Wyoming.  One reason I favor the promotion/relegation model is it gives the Wyoming’s of the world a chance to compete.  Your alternative is the larger schools along with WA and OR form a best of the rest conference that looks to cement in the 6th or 5th spot.  
 

it would not be hard for WSU, OSU, Fresno, UNLV, SDSU, BSU and maybe Hawaii/Gonzaga to form a western 6 or 7

with Memphis, Tulane, UNT, UTSA, Rice, forming a central group that extends an invite to CSU and AFA/WSU to take it or leave it.   

On 11/1/2023 at 7:32 AM, Brew_Poke said:

That'll win a football game, lol.

No but sure matters on who gets a conference invite.  Unless you are in a promotion relegation model and you can move up based on what you did on the field.  
 

the promotion/relegation model is Wyomings only shot to be in a best of the rest configuration no matter what you do on the field. 

On 10/31/2023 at 2:29 PM, SparkysDad said:

...and TV numbers go down for the now-lower-level loser's games the next season, recruiting is less robust, their coaches quit, their best players transfer, UNLV fans make fun of them, etc. #intriguing

Boy given they can go back up next year if they quit that easy great.  They probably should have been fired for quitting.   

On 10/31/2023 at 12:26 PM, SparkysDad said:

You can't expect relegation to work competitively when your best players have about 3 years on the field. A team's talent level can change too dramatically from year-to-year and frankly, college football has already changed to make that aspect of things even worse with the transfer portal. Your team gets relegated...you think your top level recruits are gonna stick around to play in the lower division?

The dynamics of change are too short term in college football and it would be extremely difficult to reverse a negative course for nearly any program. Where it works, in international soccer, the best players can play for many, many years (Messi played in 5 World Cups as an example, so 20-ish years) and teams can literally buy enough top level talent to have at least a decent shot at promotion. Not the same mechanics at all for college football.

Along with a myriad of other reasons that consistently get brought up when this is discussed here, relegation/promotion is ridiculous for college football and if attempted would be a disaster for the college football and athletic programs associated.

I love soccer and promotion/relegation in soccer but it doesn't work for college football...at all, ever!

A team's talent level can change too dramatically from year-to-year and frankly, college football has already changed to make that aspect of things even worse with the transfer portal.
 

to me the above is why you want it.  It lets the top teams compete for the playoff spot in a fair manner and it still gives hope for bottom teams like UNLV.   Transfers can only free transfer once.  
 

lastly it adds intrigue.  If the SDSU/SJSU determines who gets relegated you can be sure we are all watching.  

On 10/31/2023 at 10:59 AM, Brew_Poke said:

Yeah, that's the whole +++++ing argument. How do you meet those fixed expenses when your income gets drastically cut? Don't pay the light bill? Jesus Christ.

What part of the lower level payout equals your fixed expenses and the upper level equals you bonus amount that pays incentive bonuses and facility upgrades.   
 

the lower level payout isn’t dropping from our current TV amount.   

On 10/31/2023 at 10:50 AM, Brew_Poke said:

Scoreboard.

Well scoreboard in this case: 

Fresno Madera Hanford combined MSA: 1,328,427.  

Wyoming: 583,279

On 10/31/2023 at 12:00 PM, Nevada Convert said:

If there’s any kind of relegation, it should just be for football and all schools should equally share basic revenue streams with exception to maybe NY6 bowl games or playoff games. But for this to work, the conference needs to adopt and enforce performance minimums or get booted. If a school gets a dumbass AD and/or Prez, it’ll force them to spend the resources on athletics.

But the primary purpose for this relegation is to improve the SOS for the currently top performing schools for playoff consideration. Without it, a school might get a bad luck draw of down teams and not make the playoffs because of it. 

I think it’s just if not more important in hoops.  You all don’t need Fresno’s RPI dragging you down.