|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Aug 29, 2023 23:01:46 GMT -8
My suspicion is that after the ACC wait a "suitable" amount of time out of respect for the UNC shooting victim (no disrespect intended - esp. having been in a doctoral program, I can attest to lots of potential tension between students and advisors - especially as the years mount.....), the ACC will convene, one or more votes will have flipped, and Stanford, Cal and SMU will heave a sigh of relief at having "landed". And then they too will discover, per the late great England Dan Seals that "everything that glitters is not gold". Not that it will matter to us or WSU. If we (and perhaps more acutely, WSU) can make the numbers work for a couple years, it seems like the MWC is where we land - preserves some semblance of regionality, some like-minded (land grant research) schools, and a (relatively) short runway to the next TV contract. Or create a Pac-MWC conference to keep the name alive for the next round of contract negotiations and school invites/realignment. But to the point made earlier, being the last school with certainty or a semblance of a 2024 schedule is probably not where we want to be all season long..... My wife and I had a retirement "plan" of taking in Pac-12 road games as a pastime (we've done Cal and Stanford as a dry run thanks to family in the Bay Area). It's not the worst thing in the world to go to Logan, Ft. Collins, San Diego, Vegas, Reno - might all be superior destinations to LA :-). And in a few years, who knows where we will be journeying to?
Go Beavers!!
(note - no idea why this message has this formatting issue - attempted to edit and change, but not sure I grok the issue)Clemson, Florida State, and the North Carolinas all had their reasons to vote the way that they did before. So, who flips? I think that Cal and Stanford floating the whole Big 12 thing is to try and get someone to flip. But who is it going to be? 11 of the teams have made up their mind and may be pushing this thing forward. However, I have heard that this whole thing is still a non-starter, even giving the ACC schools the best deal possible. |
|
ftd
Junior
"I think real leaders show up when times are hard." Trent Bray 11/29/2023
Posts: 2,517
|
Post by ftd on Aug 30, 2023 5:50:35 GMT -8
From a logistics standpoint Furd and Kal going to the ACC will be a nightmare for most student athletes. SMU will be a 'short trip'....
|
|
2ndGenBeaver
Sophomore
Posts: 1,837 
Grad Year: 1991 (MS/CS) 1999 (PhD/CS)
|
Post by 2ndGenBeaver on Aug 30, 2023 5:51:53 GMT -8
My suspicion is that after the ACC wait a "suitable" amount of time out of respect for the UNC shooting victim (no disrespect intended - esp. having been in a doctoral program, I can attest to lots of potential tension between students and advisors - especially as the years mount.....), the ACC will convene, one or more votes will have flipped, and Stanford, Cal and SMU will heave a sigh of relief at having "landed". And then they too will discover, per the late great England Dan Seals that "everything that glitters is not gold". Not that it will matter to us or WSU. If we (and perhaps more acutely, WSU) can make the numbers work for a couple years, it seems like the MWC is where we land - preserves some semblance of regionality, some like-minded (land grant research) schools, and a (relatively) short runway to the next TV contract. Or create a Pac-MWC conference to keep the name alive for the next round of contract negotiations and school invites/realignment. But to the point made earlier, being the last school with certainty or a semblance of a 2024 schedule is probably not where we want to be all season long..... My wife and I had a retirement "plan" of taking in Pac-12 road games as a pastime (we've done Cal and Stanford as a dry run thanks to family in the Bay Area). It's not the worst thing in the world to go to Logan, Ft. Collins, San Diego, Vegas, Reno - might all be superior destinations to LA :-). And in a few years, who knows where we will be journeying to?
Go Beavers!!
(note - no idea why this message has this formatting issue - attempted to edit and change, but not sure I grok the issue)Clemson, Florida State, and the North Carolinas all had their reasons to vote the way that they did before. So, who flips? I think that Cal and Stanford floating the whole Big 12 thing is to try and get someone to flip. But who is it going to be? 11 of the teams have made up their mind and may be pushing this thing forward. However, I have heard that this whole thing is still a non-starter, even giving the ACC schools the best deal possible. I suspect if the "performance" clauses and pot are big enough, Florida State will flip. SMU being so charitable as to play for free, and Stanford and Cal coming in at reduced rates might just provide a big enough 'pot'? If there was a legal exit from the GoR or TV contracts, defections would have already occurred in that neck of the woods, so an enriched pot might be the only avenue they have to "grow" their revenue and sort of keep up with the Jones'. Go Beavers! |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Aug 30, 2023 10:39:42 GMT -8
Clemson, Florida State, and the North Carolinas all had their reasons to vote the way that they did before. So, who flips? I think that Cal and Stanford floating the whole Big 12 thing is to try and get someone to flip. But who is it going to be? 11 of the teams have made up their mind and may be pushing this thing forward. However, I have heard that this whole thing is still a non-starter, even giving the ACC schools the best deal possible. I suspect if the "performance" clauses and pot are big enough, Florida State will flip. SMU being so charitable as to play for free, and Stanford and Cal coming in at reduced rates might just provide a big enough 'pot'? If there was a legal exit from the GoR or TV contracts, defections would have already occurred in that neck of the woods, so an enriched pot might be the only avenue they have to "grow" their revenue and sort of keep up with the Jones'. Go Beavers! It'll be interesting as most here only focus on the Cal, Furd travel. If the ACC accept those two and SMU I do not see how the $ pan out as far as extra money. Those 15 ACC teams are now having to pay to travel west for multiple sports, several times per academic year, over the course of their current contract. Also it will be interesting on the Stanford front. Their proposed budget cuts of several sports a few years back were adamantly opposed by big donors, former influential alums, and current athletes. I will be curious to see how those groups are going to be appeased and react if indeed an ACC membership is offered/accepted. The cuts of the programs was said to be "absolute", and yet it was quickly reversed. Then comes the debt situation of Cal. I'm not sure how, (a) the Regents of the UC system can approve any situation where Cal is incurring more debt; (b) how they then can justify/enforce the UCLA "penalty" when Cal is also bolting the West Coast. There is no financial means that Cal will not be better off financially in a Pac2/3 rebuild than heading to the ACC. Academics on both campuses are very anti-athletics when it comes to the welfare of their student athletes... as both still see them as student athletes. So, with all the talk of the ACC vote there has been no mention from any source I can find that Stanford's board and the Regents are in favor of that move. In fact, I'd almost bet there is a significant amount of turmoil boiling on both campuses. |
|
|
|
Post by avidbeaver on Aug 30, 2023 12:39:39 GMT -8
They are not going to vote again until they know it will pass. There were four no votes last time. I read somewhere that there was a fifth no vote. So, there won't be a vote until they know it will pass. They won't waste their time.
|
|
|
|
Post by jrbeavo on Aug 30, 2023 12:46:16 GMT -8
They are not going to vote again until they know it will pass. There were four no votes last time. I read somewhere that there was a fifth no vote. So, there won't be a vote until they know it will pass. They won't waste their time. Meanwhile, they're wasting everyone else's.
The disposition of Stancal is the last domino here. They can't just continue in limbo forever until they have the 'votes' (which may never come). At some point, the powers that be have to acknowledge and impasse and allow schools to navigate other options.
Seems to me that if this was going to happen, it would have already happened. All of the desperate whining by Stanford aside, it is time to wrap this up. No one at Stanford wants this except their incoming coach
|
|
|
|
Post by jrbeavo on Aug 30, 2023 13:04:22 GMT -8
They are not going to vote again until they know it will pass. There were four no votes last time. I read somewhere that there was a fifth no vote. So, there won't be a vote until they know it will pass. They won't waste their time. Meanwhile, they're wasting everyone else's.
The disposition of Stancal is the last domino here. They can't just continue in limbo forever until they have the 'votes' (which may never come). At some point, the powers that be have to acknowledge an impasse and allow schools to navigate other options.
Seems to me that if this was going to happen, it would have already happened. All of the desperate whining by Stanford aside, it is time to wrap this up. No one at Stanford wants this except their incoming coach
|
|
|
|
Post by bvrbooster on Aug 30, 2023 14:51:59 GMT -8
If WSU and OSU don't have things lined up right now for when Cal and Stanford bail, they are run by incompetents. As best you can, you have to control events, not let events control you. I'm not buying that October 1 line at all, and I don't know why you'd utter it in public. I would have to guess that there are recruits in several sports that want to finalize their commitment very early in their senior year to avoid distraction. Who the hell would commit to a school where the president is saying that maybe they'll have a home 4 1/2 weeks from now - or maybe they won't. As I've posted elsewhere, after the betrayal by the bay becomes a done deal, there will be 2 - count 'em, 2 - schools in D1 with no home and no schedules for 2024. And this idiot wants to take his sweet ass time? That's lunacy! You will correct me, if I am wrong, but the only schools with a 2024 schedule are the SEC schools. And "homes" are largely irrelevant without schedules. Everyone is taking their sweet ass time, because everyone wants to get this as right as possible. By schedules, I mean they know right now they will play X number of conference games in addition to Y number of OOC games. Of the conference games, A number will be at home and B number on the road, and will include the game against their traditional rival. After Cal and Stanford bail, only OSU and WSU, in all of D1, will not be able to solve the equation for X. AS THEY WILL BE ALONE WITHOUT A CONFERENCE TO CALL HOME. The 'everyone' who wants to get this as right as possible basically includes only schools who are already entrenched in a conference, and are sure of X, Y, A and B for 2024 - 25. They, admittedly, have no sense of urgency, which is why WSU and OSU need to create that by waving money and the PAC 12 Network at them to put a deal together quickly. WSU's recruiting, like OSU's, is pretty much in limbo until this is resolved. Time is Mr. Schultz' enemy, not his friend. |
|
|
|
Post by mbabeav on Aug 30, 2023 17:36:57 GMT -8
You will correct me, if I am wrong, but the only schools with a 2024 schedule are the SEC schools. And "homes" are largely irrelevant without schedules. Everyone is taking their sweet ass time, because everyone wants to get this as right as possible. So far college administrations and the athletic departments in the Pac 4 have really worked hard at getting this as right as possible, I tellin you sumpthing here. |
|
