What if the Big10 only takes Stanford from the PAC?

And pairs them with Kansas (both not until 2024/5) to go to 18

In this case the PAC survives.

They add SDSU, Boise state, and BYU to get to 12.

This stops the B12's western movement.

B12 adds USF and SMU, to go to 12.

And stability returns, unless ACC decides to go for the eastern B12 schools plus Memphis, and/or FSU and Clemson go to the SEC.

(08-13-2022 12:37 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  What if the Big10 only takes Stanford from the PAC?

And pairs them with Kansas (both not until 2024/5) to go to 18

In this case the PAC survives.

They add SDSU, Boise state, and BYU to get to 12.

This stops the B12's western movement.

B12 adds USF and SMU, to go to 12.

And stability returns, unless ACC decides to go for the eastern B12 schools plus Memphis, and/or FSU and Clemson go to the SEC.

Pac loses 1, they disintegrate.

Consolidation would occur.

B1G is only going to take Stanford to go to 18 if ND is the prize that goes with them. In that case Cal is pissed but nobody cares deeply enough and they add 1-3 to go to either 10 or 12.

Right now the Big 10 is taking no one else. There's little reason to believe that would change anytime soon. It's possible that at some point in the future, be it 5 years or 87 years, that Notre Dame agrees to join the Big 10 and its possible the Big 10 seeks to add another school as well, possibly from the PAC. I doubt it would change much though. If, in a hypothetical, just Stanford left, there's little reason the PAC wouldn't just continue on in basically the same form.

Honestly, with how the PAC has struggled over the years with expansion and revenue opportunities over the years, Stanford would be a way to poison the Big Ten's well. You know the name and the academics...but you have to look past it. And their zip code. I look at that goofy tree as probably the leading reason for the PAC's current issues. You don't reward that with a Big Ten spot, imo.

Then again, I felt this very same way about two of the additions the conference made in the previous decade, too.

I hope not. We don't need another Northwestern in the conference

If Stanford is the only team taken, it's because it allowed the B1G to land ND which is the end game.

Do they stay at 18? Maybe.... Maybe they add Oregon and Washington to go to 20, which makes a neat 5 team west division.

Regardless the rest of the Pac 10 is toast. The 4 corner schools will join the Big 16 and WSU and OSU will either absorb most of the MWC or join it outright.

(08-13-2022 03:39 PM)Jeff Smithers Wrote:  I hope not. We don't need another Northwestern in the conference

I love how out of touch fanspeak is. University presidents love Northwestern. University presidents love Stanford.

“We” in this context only represents people who don’t matter, don’t understand, and are not relevant to realignment. The university presidents’ “we” (the only “we” that matters) has a much different opinion.

350 + 350 + 800 = 1.5 billion

what is fox getting, [3 games OTA, 3 games BTN]
that on avg that leaves 2 FB games a week, and all of BB
where are they putting them 2 games ?
the only open spot is 10:30

(08-13-2022 04:05 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(08-13-2022 03:39 PM)Jeff Smithers Wrote:  I hope not. We don't need another Northwestern in the conference

I love how out of touch fanspeak is. University presidents love Northwestern. University presidents love Stanford.

“We” in this context only represents people who don’t matter, don’t understand, and are not relevant to realignment. The university presidents’ “we” (the only “we” that matters) has a much different opinion.

I get what you're saying but I think the whole idea of thinking like a university president is no longer as relevant as it once was. I would agree that university presidents mattered most when schools were making 20 or 30 million a year from TV revenue. With the level of revenues that are coming in now, I'm not so sure. I believe thinking like a TV executive is now how college realignment should be viewed. As a TV executive, I don't see how adding Stanford adds any value to the TV contract.

(08-13-2022 02:16 PM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  B1G is only going to take Stanford to go to 18 if ND is the prize that goes with them. In that case Cal is pissed but nobody cares deeply enough and they add 1-3 to go to either 10 or 12.

The same would hold for Kansas - the only way they’d possibly get that invitation would be if paired with ND, and even that would be extremely implausible. It would be interesting as far as a move to add a major brand in each sport, but the fundamentals simply aren’t there, and it’s not as though KU would be an enticement that’d finally get ND to drop independence.

(08-13-2022 04:23 PM)Jeff Smithers Wrote:  

(08-13-2022 04:05 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(08-13-2022 03:39 PM)Jeff Smithers Wrote:  I hope not. We don't need another Northwestern in the conference

I love how out of touch fanspeak is. University presidents love Northwestern. University presidents love Stanford.

“We” in this context only represents people who don’t matter, don’t understand, and are not relevant to realignment. The university presidents’ “we” (the only “we” that matters) has a much different opinion.

I get what you're saying but I think the whole idea of thinking like a university president is no longer as relevant as it once was. I would agree that university presidents mattered most when schools were making 20 or 30 million a year from TV revenue. With the level of revenues that are coming in now, I'm not so sure. I believe thinking like a TV executive is now how college realignment should be viewed. As a TV executive, I don't see how adding Stanford adds any value to the TV contract.

The BIG presidents still have complete agency. This isn’t the PAC or Big 12 hoping to survive.

And adding a Bay Area franchise fits with the NFL model FOX is building the BIG into.

(08-13-2022 04:29 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-13-2022 04:23 PM)Jeff Smithers Wrote:  

(08-13-2022 04:05 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(08-13-2022 03:39 PM)Jeff Smithers Wrote:  I hope not. We don't need another Northwestern in the conference

I love how out of touch fanspeak is. University presidents love Northwestern. University presidents love Stanford.

“We” in this context only represents people who don’t matter, don’t understand, and are not relevant to realignment. The university presidents’ “we” (the only “we” that matters) has a much different opinion.

I get what you're saying but I think the whole idea of thinking like a university president is no longer as relevant as it once was. I would agree that university presidents mattered most when schools were making 20 or 30 million a year from TV revenue. With the level of revenues that are coming in now, I'm not so sure. I believe thinking like a TV executive is now how college realignment should be viewed. As a TV executive, I don't see how adding Stanford adds any value to the TV contract.

The BIG presidents still have complete agency. This isn’t the PAC or Big 12 hoping to survive.

And adding a Bay Area franchise fits with the NFL model FOX is building the BIG into.

The presidents do have complete control of who enters the conference. But why would they make a decision that puts their own universities at a competitive disadvantage in terms of television revenue by taking a university that will decrease the per share amount?

Any of the universities in the B1G can work directly with Stanford in research without admitting them to the athletic conference.

(08-13-2022 03:35 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  Honestly, with how the PAC has struggled over the years with expansion and revenue opportunities over the years, Stanford would be a way to poison the Big Ten's well. You know the name and the academics...but you have to look past it. And their zip code. I look at that goofy tree as probably the leading reason for the PAC's current issues. You don't reward that with a Big Ten spot, imo.

Then again, I felt this very same way about two of the additions the conference made in the previous decade, too.

I agree with you that Stanford would be a net negative for the Big 10, academics aside. Seriously, Stanford’s attendance was low even when they were good in the early to mid 2010s. If the Big Ten adds two from the PAC, it’ll be Oregon and Washington.


Interesting that you brought up the M and R additions that the Big 10 invited a decade ago, because I actually think that Stanford would be a better addition than those two were. (In particular the R addition.) But I think the Big Ten now regrets its M & R additions, and half the reason why the Big Ten is hesitant to add more PAC teams is because the Big 10 learned its lesson and realizes you need to do some research before adding random warm bodies to the conference.


But the M&R expansion might have caused the Big 10 to now go too much to the other extreme, where they now hesitate to add schools like Washington and Oregon that actually probably are good adds.

(08-13-2022 04:29 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-13-2022 04:23 PM)Jeff Smithers Wrote:  

(08-13-2022 04:05 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(08-13-2022 03:39 PM)Jeff Smithers Wrote:  I hope not. We don't need another Northwestern in the conference

I love how out of touch fanspeak is. University presidents love Northwestern. University presidents love Stanford.

“We” in this context only represents people who don’t matter, don’t understand, and are not relevant to realignment. The university presidents’ “we” (the only “we” that matters) has a much different opinion.

I get what you're saying but I think the whole idea of thinking like a university president is no longer as relevant as it once was. I would agree that university presidents mattered most when schools were making 20 or 30 million a year from TV revenue. With the level of revenues that are coming in now, I'm not so sure. I believe thinking like a TV executive is now how college realignment should be viewed. As a TV executive, I don't see how adding Stanford adds any value to the TV contract.

The BIG presidents still have complete agency. This isn’t the PAC or Big 12 hoping to survive.

And adding a Bay Area franchise fits with the NFL model FOX is building the BIG into.

Stanford has hardly any following in the Bay Area. Frankly, if you care that much about the Bay Area tv market, Cal is a better choice than Stanford. But Cal is still a distant third in the PAC in value behind Oregon and Washington.


I think the Maryland and Rutgers expansion (I’m just going to write out the school’s names now) taught the Big 10 that mindlessly expanding with big market teams that have next to no following in their local area is not a good idea. I do think that Stanford would be a less bad addition than Maryland and Rutgers, but that isn’t saying a lot. Stanford almost certainly would take more revenue from the Big Ten than they’d add, even before you take travel expenses into account.

(08-13-2022 03:39 PM)Jeff Smithers Wrote:  I hope not. We don't need another Northwestern in the conference

Amen.

(08-13-2022 04:29 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  And adding a Bay Area franchise fits with the NFL model FOX is building the BIG into.

Then invite a school who accepts more than 5% of the Bay Area's college students. If only there was a P5 school in the Bay Area that's a flagship of the most populous state in the country the Big 10 could take instead...

I doubt that Stanford would be added even as a partner to Notre Dame. Notre Dame will have basically no power over who gets added with them. At this point, the conferences hold the cards, not ND.

I’ve seen the even more absurd idea that the ACC will add Navy football and ND football proposed on this website. All I have to say about that is Jesus Christ, help me.

(08-13-2022 04:05 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(08-13-2022 03:39 PM)Jeff Smithers Wrote:  I hope not. We don't need another Northwestern in the conference

I love how out of touch fanspeak is. University presidents love Northwestern. University presidents love Stanford.

“We” in this context only represents people who don’t matter, don’t understand, and are not relevant to realignment. The university presidents’ “we” (the only “we” that matters) has a much different opinion.

Kevin Warren would like a word with you.

Perhaps the real issue is that UW/Oregon/maybe the Bay area teams are sort of desirable to the B1G, but they don't want to be viewed as murdering the Pac, so they're biding their time. In that scenario, they could easily let a couple of people know what their long term thinking is, incidentally blocking the ACC from making any inroads in the PNW, then sit back and watch the Pac get a super lowball network deal offered and lose the 4 corners to the big 12. All of a sudden, the nbig12 are the bad guys, and the B1G swoops in to rescue 2-4 PNW teams.

One thing that has me unsure about Stanford is that, even though the Presidents are calling all the shots now like they used to, Stanford does have that Yale-like $28b endowment. Ivy League prestige with decent performance on the field might be too much for them to resist.