|
|
Post by dallasvolley on Aug 7, 2023 9:28:19 GMT -5
I am praying Stanford are able to join a good conference. This could be the end of the cardinal volleyball. Why would someone choose to play there if they are in a %*$#ty conference and play %*$#ty opponents with no telvision coverage. It would be a determent for many deciding where to commit.
|
|
|
|
Post by jcvball22 on Aug 7, 2023 9:35:30 GMT -5
I am praying Stanford are able to join a good conference. This could be the end of the cardinal volleyball. Why would someone choose to play there if they are in a %*$#ty conference and play %*$#ty opponents with no telvision coverage. It would be a determent for many deciding where to commit. Because they want a Stanford education? |
|
|
|
Post by dallasvolley on Aug 7, 2023 9:49:19 GMT -5
True, but teenagers who are on the fence and are deciding out of a few schools might choose differently. I really don't understand why Stanford would not be attractive for big conferences. They are the number one sports school and the academics speak for itself.
|
|
|
|
Post by huskerjen on Aug 7, 2023 9:56:37 GMT -5
True, but teenagers who are on the fence and are deciding out of a few schools might choose differently. I really don't understand why Stanford would not be attractive for big conferences. They are the number one sports school and the academics speak for itself. Stanford is obviously attractive. It's the financials which are the obstacle. For example, members of the B1G won't want to give them a full share because it dilutes the revenue for already-member schools. Simply, I think Stanford is interested in the B1G and the feeling is mutual, but how much Stanford wants vs. what the B1G is willing to give will be the negotiation sticking point. |
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Aug 7, 2023 10:29:31 GMT -5
True, but teenagers who are on the fence and are deciding out of a few schools might choose differently. I really don't understand why Stanford would not be attractive for big conferences. They are the number one sports school and the academics speak for itself. Stanford is obviously attractive. It's the financials which are the obstacle. For example, members of the B1G won't want to give them a full share because it dilutes the revenue for already-member schools. Simply, I think Stanford is interested in the B1G and the feeling is mutual, but how much Stanford wants vs. what the B1G is willing to give will be the negotiation sticking point. I just don't think Stanford will be in a rush to make what might be a rash decision about a conference. Also, they can probably hold their own as an independent in most sports (maybe not basketball, where scheduling would be extremely brutal) for 5 years or longer. They could simply (that is if the conferences wanted to take them on for some potential exit fees) play in the Big West or WCC potentially for a cost. yes those are not P5, but if one looks closely at EACH sport, it's not a death wish for 4-5 years, especially the Big West. The benefit to the BIg West or WCC would be getting home and homes with Stanford. Stanford really isn't a fit for either. WCC is religious private, Big West is public. Academically, the Big West is the best fit with 5 UCs, and 4 of the top 50, it's not a slouch at the top. MVB: top rated conference WVB: not ideal aside from Hawaii and maybe Beach/UCSB/Poly Baseball: typical a couple top 25/50 teams in the Big West. UCLA/USC leaving Pac-12 for a mediocre B1G anyway. would you really rather play baseball March-April in teh B1G? Beach VB: would rival top conferences with Hawaii/Beach/Poly who typically send 2 teams anyway. Water Polo: Big West is the only conference that supports both mens and womens. woudl also stick it to UCLA/USC to figure things out for MWP SOccer: not ideal, typically two top decent teams Tennis: wouldn't matter, Stanford would remain elite. USC/UCLA leaving teh Pac-12 diminished the Pac-12 anyway the point is, people that who think this is a death-knoll for Stanford Olympic sprorts I think are mistaken. I think Stanford is likely to bide time to go independent football while parking their Olympic sports potentially if they can get an agreement with the Big West or WCC; neither is perfect long-term or even a great fit. cost-wise though WCC/Big West is extremely low travel compared to even the Pac-12 was. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2023 12:07:12 GMT -5
Cardinal will be alright, Cal on the other hand they will be middling even in the big west.
|
|
|
|
Post by isaacspaceman on Aug 7, 2023 13:32:53 GMT -5
Stanford is obviously attractive. It's the financials which are the obstacle. For example, members of the B1G won't want to give them a full share because it dilutes the revenue for already-member schools. Simply, I think Stanford is interested in the B1G and the feeling is mutual, but how much Stanford wants vs. what the B1G is willing to give will be the negotiation sticking point. I just don't think Stanford will be in a rush to make what might be a rash decision about a conference. Also, they can probably hold their own as an independent in most sports (maybe not basketball, where scheduling would be extremely brutal) for 5 years or longer. They could simply (that is if the conferences wanted to take them on for some potential exit fees) play in the Big West or WCC potentially for a cost. yes those are not P5, but if one looks closely at EACH sport, it's not a death wish for 4-5 years, especially the Big West. The benefit to the BIg West or WCC would be getting home and homes with Stanford. Stanford really isn't a fit for either. WCC is religious private, Big West is public. Academically, the Big West is the best fit with 5 UCs, and 4 of the top 50, it's not a slouch at the top. MVB: top rated conference WVB: not ideal aside from Hawaii and maybe Beach/UCSB/Poly Baseball: typical a couple top 25/50 teams in the Big West. UCLA/USC leaving Pac-12 for a mediocre B1G anyway. would you really rather play baseball March-April in teh B1G? Beach VB: would rival top conferences with Hawaii/Beach/Poly who typically send 2 teams anyway. Water Polo: Big West is the only conference that supports both mens and womens. woudl also stick it to UCLA/USC to figure things out for MWP SOccer: not ideal, typically two top decent teams Tennis: wouldn't matter, Stanford would remain elite. USC/UCLA leaving teh Pac-12 diminished the Pac-12 anyway the point is, people that who think this is a death-knoll for Stanford Olympic sprorts I think are mistaken. I think Stanford is likely to bide time to go independent football while parking their Olympic sports potentially if they can get an agreement with the Big West or WCC; neither is perfect long-term or even a great fit. cost-wise though WCC/Big West is extremely low travel compared to even the Pac-12 was. What I think you are not properly weighing is the cost of the sports other than FB and men’s BB. Stanford has a number of national-caliber teams playing other top teams all around the country. How do they pay for those programs? The $20.8MM from the Pac-12 football deal and whatever Stanford receives as the conference share of March Madness is the largest source of that revenue. Switch to the MWC and you’re getting $4MM in football dollars and less than Pac-12 money (I don’t know how much less) in basketball tournament dollars. Or maybe you think you can be an independent and sell your football broadcasting rights for $4MM, but I doubt any independent other than Norte Dame can put together a slate of games people want to watch that much. Either way, you’re now looking at having to balance the athletic department budget with $16MM or so less revenue than you had in 2022 (and $30-50MM less than the former Pac teams that just went to the Big Ten). But other leagues do it without football dollars, you protest. Sure, but most of them are aggressively regional. You can save some money taking buses instead of planes and by not staying in hotels. But the problem with regionalism on the west coast is that everything is just spread out way more than on the east coast. Honestly, I don’t know how Hawaii affords intercollegiate athletics. Anyway, if Stanford thought its athletic budget was too large when it was getting nearly $21MM in Pac-12 football money, donors are really going to have to step up if they don’t want to lose national prominence with a football team that only breaks even, if that. |
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Aug 7, 2023 13:49:41 GMT -5
I just don't think Stanford will be in a rush to make what might be a rash decision about a conference. Also, they can probably hold their own as an independent in most sports (maybe not basketball, where scheduling would be extremely brutal) for 5 years or longer. They could simply (that is if the conferences wanted to take them on for some potential exit fees) play in the Big West or WCC potentially for a cost. yes those are not P5, but if one looks closely at EACH sport, it's not a death wish for 4-5 years, especially the Big West. The benefit to the BIg West or WCC would be getting home and homes with Stanford. Stanford really isn't a fit for either. WCC is religious private, Big West is public. Academically, the Big West is the best fit with 5 UCs, and 4 of the top 50, it's not a slouch at the top. MVB: top rated conference WVB: not ideal aside from Hawaii and maybe Beach/UCSB/Poly Baseball: typical a couple top 25/50 teams in the Big West. UCLA/USC leaving Pac-12 for a mediocre B1G anyway. would you really rather play baseball March-April in teh B1G? Beach VB: would rival top conferences with Hawaii/Beach/Poly who typically send 2 teams anyway. Water Polo: Big West is the only conference that supports both mens and womens. woudl also stick it to UCLA/USC to figure things out for MWP SOccer: not ideal, typically two top decent teams Tennis: wouldn't matter, Stanford would remain elite. USC/UCLA leaving teh Pac-12 diminished the Pac-12 anyway the point is, people that who think this is a death-knoll for Stanford Olympic sprorts I think are mistaken. I think Stanford is likely to bide time to go independent football while parking their Olympic sports potentially if they can get an agreement with the Big West or WCC; neither is perfect long-term or even a great fit. cost-wise though WCC/Big West is extremely low travel compared to even the Pac-12 was. What I think you are not properly weighing is the cost of the sports other than FB and men’s BB. Stanford has a number of national-caliber teams playing other top teams all around the country. How do they pay for those programs? The $20.8MM from the Pac-12 football deal and whatever Stanford receives as the conference share of March Madness is the largest source of that revenue. Switch to the MWC and you’re getting $4MM in football dollars and less than Pac-12 money (I don’t know how much less) in basketball tournament dollars. Or maybe you think you can be an independent and sell your football broadcasting rights for $4MM, but I doubt any independent other than Norte Dame can put together a slate of games people want to watch that much. Either way, you’re now looking at having to balance the athletic department budget with $16MM or so less revenue than you had in 2022 (and $30-50MM less than the former Pac teams that just went to the Big Ten). But other leagues do it without football dollars, you protest. Sure, but most of them are aggressively regional. You can save some money taking buses instead of planes and by not staying in hotels. But the problem with regionalism on the west coast is that everything is just spread out way more than on the east coast. Honestly, I don’t know how Hawaii affords intercollegiate athletics. Anyway, if Stanford thought its athletic budget was too large when it was getting nearly $21MM in Pac-12 football money, donors are really going to have to step up if they don’t want to lose national prominence with a football team that only breaks even, if that. agree, the question Stanford may have to weigh is how much less in travel playing WCC/Big West teams. and it is substantially less than even playing Pac-12 teams, other than Hawaii, you can almost get away with same day travel or one night, with everything a 45 minute flight in most cases. as to $4 mil, have to believe if teh Pac-4 joined the Mtn West, they coudl get that to double (something) but yeah not near what they get. It's why I think Stanford at least for interim (if lobbying the B1G to relent doesn't work) will look at either trying to be football indepedent and putting Olympic in Big West or WCC, or carving a deal with the Mountain West but doubt they'll committ to anything beyond 3-5 years and agree to some high exit fee, it has to be a potentially mid-term deal that benefits both IMO. but I just see Cal being so deer in the headlights ("why is this happenging to us in sports") and Stanford so above it all, I wonder if the Pac-4 can decide anything. OSU/WSU are the ones that want to make a deal asap and retain whatever Pac-12 tie-in access they can retain. Not so sure that Cal/Stanford will be able to deal with the urgency as well. it's now a really odd pairing, the two highest academic Pac-12 teams with about the two lowest (ASU is gone) Pac-12 academic teams. How can anything get done in time for 2024 is a good question, when time is of the essence to join any league, and Stanford (the big cheese) doesn't feel a sense of urgency. The statements by teh OSU AD that they have time I don't think is really true. Watch, come mid-October, and there is no agreement, well the clock is ticking. The Mountain West has some leverage for maybe the only time they'll ever have it again, so will be interesting. I do think teh Big West should take a flyer and offer Cal/Stanford associate membership in their Olympic sports for a 5 year deal, and then a reasonable extortion fee to do so, say $1-2mil per year on top of the usual contributions, and a $5 mil exit fee when they finally get another offer. Or something like that. I think Cal/Stanford right now may want some flexibility, I can't see the Mountain West due to football being so accomadating, totally different model. The Big West did that awhile back with BOise/SDSU and collected some money out of it with BOise/SDSU not playing a single Big West event, they exited before they started. |
|
|
|
Post by cbrown1709 on Aug 7, 2023 18:23:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by slxpress on Aug 7, 2023 18:47:09 GMT -5
I put the chances of that happening at zero. The most valuable entities are already screaming about how they’re not getting paid enough, and then you want to add a couple of schools because of their outstanding academic reputations to the mix who will drive the cost of doing business up without adding to the value? If this was the old ACC prior to the inclusion of Florida State and Miami, and pre-Dabo Sweeney era when Clemson had no clout I’d say sure. But not now. And that’s even assuming Stanford would agree to an affiliation with a conference literally across the country. That said, that it’s even being seriously contemplated at the level these conversations are taking place says something about how much the nature of college athletics has drastically changed. The Atlantic Coast Conference is holding discussions on the viability of adding Stanford and Cal. What a world we live in. I still think for Stanford it’s Big 10 or bust, whenever that invite might come. Just use the PAC name to roll in the NCAA tournament credits and get a spot in the CFP payouts with the Mountain West teams that come aboard, and leave for the Big 10 at the first opportunity, regardless of the initial half share offered, like with Oregon and Washington. Or give up competing st the highest levels of college athletics. I don’t see there being other options that are palatable for the stakeholders of Stanford. They’ll hold their noses at joining either the Big 12 or SEC, and the numbers for the Big 12 put them at a perpetual disadvantage anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by cbrown1709 on Aug 7, 2023 19:14:00 GMT -5
Not the ACC.. I still think for Stanford it’s Big 10 or bust, whenever that invite might come. Just use the PAC name to roll in the NCAA tournament credits and get a spot in the CFP payouts with the Mountain West teams that come aboard, and leave for the Big 10 at the first opportunity, regardless of the initial half share offered, like with Oregon and Washington. Or give up competing st the highest levels of college athletics. I don’t see there being other options that are palatable for the stakeholders of Stanford. They’ll hold their noses at joining either the Big 12 or SEC, and the numbers for the Big 12 put them at a perpetual disadvantage anyway. I hope so |
|
|
|
Post by isaacspaceman on Aug 7, 2023 19:56:47 GMT -5
as to $4 mil, have to believe if teh Pac-4 joined the Mtn West, they coudl get that to double (something) but yeah not near what they get. It's why I think Stanford at least for interim (if lobbying the B1G to relent doesn't work) will look at either trying to be football indepedent and putting Olympic in Big West or WCC, or carving a deal with the Mountain West but doubt they'll committ to anything beyond 3-5 years and agree to some high exit fee, it has to be a potentially mid-term deal that benefits both IMO. I'm not sure you and I are disagreeing about much of anything, but I do not think it would be possible to get the MWC deal to double. First, the deal doesn't expire until the end of 2026, I think, so that's two years before you can even renegotiate. CBS and Fox would have to agree to add the Pac-4, but they're holding all of the leverage here, so I don't know why they'd up the amount. They'd obviously have to agree to raise the $270MM overall amount by at least $16MM per year just to pay each of the Pac-4 $4MM (I doubt the existing MWC teams would reduce their own share of the $270MM just for the privilege of playing the Pac-4). I'm not even sure it's possible to get CBS and Fox to agree to that $16MM increase, since they just paid a premium for the right to broadcast some more attractive West Coast games (the inventory from the new members of the Big Ten), and Fox also just paid for the additional inventory of the new Big-12 members. CBS and Fox might actually be looking for ways to decrease their MWC inventory to make room for late-night Big Ten/Big-12 games. My point is that there doesn't seem to be a path to increasing the per-school payout until at least after 2026, and maybe not even then. Second, even if there were broadcasting demand and capacity, to increase that share, you'd have to expect better ratings from games involving the Pac-4 teams than the best of the existing teams. Are you really drawing a significantly larger audience, and significantly greater TV revenue, from each of the Pac-4 teams' games than from games involving SJSU, SDSU, and Boise State? It's probably a larger number for Stanford and Cal, maybe even for OSU and WSU (though who knows, especially in the absence of the draw of the teams they used to play), but I doubt it's significant, other than the Stanford-Cal game. Would it justify doubling the MWC's per-game deal? I'm skeptical. Third, the math is awful here. Are you suggesting that CBS/Fox would double the entire package, so that every team in the MWC gets double? I doubt CBS/Fox would agree to that. But then are you suggesting that Stanford/Cal/OSU/WSU would get $8MM and the existing MWC teams would get a reduced share of their own TV contract? Hard to see them swallowing that. Or maybe you're thinking CBS would only increase the per-game payout for games involving the Pac-4 teams? Still a stumbling block for the MWC, and even then you'd still need to increase the size of the contract beyond the additional $32MM for the Pac-4 teams so that their opponents in the games broadcast would also benefit from that. It's just very hard to see a path to anything beyond $4MM/year (if even that) in the MWC through the end of the 2025-2026 basketball season, and hard to see any significant increase even then. As for going it as an independent like Notre Dame, is anybody going to pay more than $4MM a year for the right to broadcast all of Stanford's home games? At best, Stanford is going to have one game against Notre Dame every other year and maybe one or two other top-25 teams on a home-and-home every other year. After Week 3, every college team other than Notre Dame (and the other Pac-4 teams, maybe) will be locked into its conference season. Basically, Stanford needs to get into a conference, and it needs to do it quickly so it can start playing in the new conference in 2024. There are a lot of reasons why the Big Ten might take Stanford, and also a lot of reasons why it might not. But Stanford's position as a non-FB athletic powerhouse and its utopian view that athletic conferences should have some academic and cultural similarity makes it a tough fit with any other surviving conference. |
|
vbruh
Junior
Posts: 343
Member is Online
|
Post by vbruh on Aug 7, 2023 20:13:38 GMT -5
Good read. I don't see a way out for Stanford other than Big10, mainly for football, volleyball, basketball, baseball, softball. Stanford's Olympic sports already play in a Hybrid conference scenario (men's soccer, beach volleyball, water polo, etc.) and continue to do so, very regional, very much west coast focused. No hockey, but Stanford does have WRESTLING, that would be an interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Aug 7, 2023 20:31:34 GMT -5
as to $4 mil, have to believe if teh Pac-4 joined the Mtn West, they coudl get that to double (something) but yeah not near what they get. It's why I think Stanford at least for interim (if lobbying the B1G to relent doesn't work) will look at either trying to be football indepedent and putting Olympic in Big West or WCC, or carving a deal with the Mountain West but doubt they'll committ to anything beyond 3-5 years and agree to some high exit fee, it has to be a potentially mid-term deal that benefits both IMO. I'm not sure you and I are disagreeing about much of anything, but I do not think it would be possible to get the MWC deal to double. First, the deal doesn't expire until the end of 2026, I think, so that's two years before you can even renegotiate. CBS and Fox would have to agree to add the Pac-4, but they're holding all of the leverage here, so I don't know why they'd up the amount. They'd obviously have to agree to raise the $270MM overall amount by at least $16MM just to pay each of the Pac-4 $4MM (I doubt the existing MWC teams would reduce their own share of the $270MM just for the privilege of playing the Pac-4). I'm not even sure it's possible to get CBS and Fox to agree to that $16MM increase, since they just paid a premium for the right to broadcast some more attractive West Coast games (the inventory from the new members of the Big Ten), and Fox also just paid for the additional inventory of the new Big-12 members. CBS and Fox might actually be looking for ways to decrease their MWC inventory to make room for late-night Big Ten/Big-12 games. My point is that there doesn't seem to be a path to increasing the per-school payout until at least after 2026, and maybe not even then. Second, even if there were broadcasting demand and capacity, to increase that share, you'd have to expect better ratings from games involving the Pac-4 teams than the best of the existing teams. Are you really drawing a significantly larger audience, and significantly greater TV revenue, from each of the Pac-4 teams' games than from games involving SJSU, SDSU, and Boise State? It's probably a larger number for Stanford and Cal, maybe even for OSU and WSU (though who knows, especially in the absence of the draw of the teams they used to play), but I doubt it's significant, other than the Stanford-Cal game. Would it justify doubling the MWC's per-game deal? I'm skeptical. Third, the math is awful here. Are you suggesting that CBS/Fox would double the entire package, so that every team in the MWC gets double? I doubt CBS/Fox would agree to that. But then are you suggesting that Stanford/Cal/OSU/WSU would get $8MM and the existing MWC teams would get a reduced share of their own TV contract? Hard to see them swallowing that. Or maybe you're thinking CBS would only increase the per-game payout for games involving the Pac-4 teams? Still a stumbling block for the MWC, and even then you'd still need to increase the size of the contract beyond the additional $32MM for the Pac-4 teams so that their opponents in the games broadcast would also benefit from that. It's just very hard to see a path to anything beyond $4MM/year (if even that) in the MWC through the end of the 2025-2026 basketball season, and hard to see any significant increase even then. As for going it as an independent like Notre Dame, is anybody going to pay more than $4MM a year for the right to broadcast all of Stanford's home games? At best, Stanford is going to have one game against Notre Dame every other year and maybe one or two other top-25 teams on a home-and-home every other year. After Week 3, every college team other than Notre Dame (and the other Pac-4 teams, maybe) will be locked into its conference season. Basically, Stanford needs to get into a conference, and it needs to do it quickly so it can start playing in the new conference in 2024. There are a lot of reasons why the Big Ten might take Stanford, and also a lot of reasons why it might not. But Stanford's position as a non-FB athletic powerhouse and its utopian view that athletic conferences should have some academic and cultural similarity makes it a tough fit with any other surviving conference. I'm just going by that if Moutain west w/o teh Pac-4 is 4 mil / team, then adding those shoudl increase some premium / team, so yeah, probably not double then if Apple was able to offer $20 mil/ team, the Pac-4 is probaby worth less, maybe $12 mil/ team, so the Mtn West might draw some interest to up their contract, but who knows. still, it's hard to see Stanford stooping to teh Mountain West, and especially if they were only able to get a paltry 8 mil / year. the thing is Stanford doesn't have the leverage they think they have - it's a tough pill to see yourself as 'deserving' of $50 mil a year, and all anybody will offer is $25 mil a year or even mjuch less, ouch! to me, Stanford won't chomp at a low offer, but that's not good. Stanford can only have leverage by waiting out for a better scenario, that miht not every happend. if any school can wait it out for 3-4, maybe 5 years with some success (maybe not football success) it's Stanford. this just has all the earmarks of a disaaster for Cal, maybe not as much for Stanford. hard to see how it ends well, B1G, ACC, Big 12, whoever offers is gonna ask for a lower thatn the standard shared rate. what happens when there is no path - that's where this may go. Cal has to be begging the B1G at this point, but this isn't academic research. People aren't paying to watch the linear accelerator matches between Cal and Stanford. It's why I think Stanford / Cal might choose to stall by parking their sports in the WCC/Big West for a while, simply because it's the least cost 'waiting' option, assuming either of those would entertain that, if approached. to most people that sounds laughable, but the Mountain West would want permanency. it's like it'll be all or nothing. |
|
|
|
Post by slxpress on Aug 7, 2023 21:12:57 GMT -5
as to $4 mil, have to believe if teh Pac-4 joined the Mtn West, they coudl get that to double (something) but yeah not near what they get. It's why I think Stanford at least for interim (if lobbying the B1G to relent doesn't work) will look at either trying to be football indepedent and putting Olympic in Big West or WCC, or carving a deal with the Mountain West but doubt they'll committ to anything beyond 3-5 years and agree to some high exit fee, it has to be a potentially mid-term deal that benefits both IMO. I'm not sure you and I are disagreeing about much of anything, but I do not think it would be possible to get the MWC deal to double. First, the deal doesn't expire until the end of 2026, I think, so that's two years before you can even renegotiate. CBS and Fox would have to agree to add the Pac-4, but they're holding all of the leverage here, so I don't know why they'd up the amount. They'd obviously have to agree to raise the $270MM overall amount by at least $16MM just to pay each of the Pac-4 $4MM (I doubt the existing MWC teams would reduce their own share of the $270MM just for the privilege of playing the Pac-4). I'm not even sure it's possible to get CBS and Fox to agree to that $16MM increase, since they just paid a premium for the right to broadcast some more attractive West Coast games (the inventory from the new members of the Big Ten), and Fox also just paid for the additional inventory of the new Big-12 members. CBS and Fox might actually be looking for ways to decrease their MWC inventory to make room for late-night Big Ten/Big-12 games. My point is that there doesn't seem to be a path to increasing the per-school payout until at least after 2026, and maybe not even then. Second, even if there were broadcasting demand and capacity, to increase that share, you'd have to expect better ratings from games involving the Pac-4 teams than the best of the existing teams. Are you really drawing a significantly larger audience, and significantly greater TV revenue, from each of the Pac-4 teams' games than from games involving SJSU, SDSU, and Boise State? It's probably a larger number for Stanford and Cal, maybe even for OSU and WSU (though who knows, especially in the absence of the draw of the teams they used to play), but I doubt it's significant, other than the Stanford-Cal game. Would it justify doubling the MWC's per-game deal? I'm skeptical. Third, the math is awful here. Are you suggesting that CBS/Fox would double the entire package, so that every team in the MWC gets double? I doubt CBS/Fox would agree to that. But then are you suggesting that Stanford/Cal/OSU/WSU would get $8MM and the existing MWC teams would get a reduced share of their own TV contract? Hard to see them swallowing that. Or maybe you're thinking CBS would only increase the per-game payout for games involving the Pac-4 teams? Still a stumbling block for the MWC, and even then you'd still need to increase the size of the contract beyond the additional $32MM for the Pac-4 teams so that their opponents in the games broadcast would also benefit from that. It's just very hard to see a path to anything beyond $4MM/year (if even that) in the MWC through the end of the 2025-2026 basketball season, and hard to see any significant increase even then. As for going it as an independent like Notre Dame, is anybody going to pay more than $4MM a year for the right to broadcast all of Stanford's home games? At best, Stanford is going to have one game against Notre Dame every other year and maybe one or two other top-25 teams on a home-and-home every other year. After Week 3, every college team other than Notre Dame (and the other Pac-4 teams, maybe) will be locked into its conference season. Basically, Stanford needs to get into a conference, and it needs to do it quickly so it can start playing in the new conference in 2024. There are a lot of reasons why the Big Ten might take Stanford, and also a lot of reasons why it might not. But Stanford's position as a non-FB athletic powerhouse and its utopian view that athletic conferences should have some academic and cultural similarity makes it a tough fit with any other surviving conference. That’s my position, too. The problem for me is that Stanford’s emergency does not constitute an emergency for the Big 10, so Stanford has to wait until the Big 10 chooses to extend an invite. Maybe that happens for 2024, but maybe it doesn’t. Stanford’s issues if it doesn’t are not the Big 10’s problem. To me they grabbed the four most valuable entities from a football perspective. Stanford’s primary appeal is their academics and their insistence on pursuing athletic excellence without compromising their academic integrity. While I do feel like that’s compelling, how compelling is a different question. In any case, as long as Stanford is determined to compete in college athletics at the highest level, I feel certain the Big 10 will find a place for them. When and at what cost I have no idea. |
|
