CalBear95

I’m bipolar and even I can’t take these mood swings. I’m not even a Duck and I feel a sense of dread at being relegated to play the PNWs version of Okie St for the Big XII The Ducks are soooooooo close to becoming perennial and the just like that, it slips away. Why why why why why!!!!!!????? And then my wife comes in and asks me what is my problem and I go back to hunting for crumbs of information on what will happen knowing that they don’t exist I’ve fallen so far I am even following Canzano on Twitter. God help me….

Example: Fuskies

I didn’t even think about this factor and as the author notes, it’s non-trivial especially in light of non sporting news. This also make’s abandoning Cal even more problematic. I don’t know how this would impact Stanford as they are private but I’m not sure they would want to take on such a third rail issue in the state if it kiboshed UCLA I would hope UCLA already thought this through and felt they could work within the current legal constraints but if not, this is going to be a train wreck. I mean catastrophically embarrassing. Like people getting fired bad. The pressure to not make exceptions to these legal constraints so to enable this move will be beyond enormous (I have a value opinion on this but regardless of what that is, this statement is simply one of fact)

USC and UCLA aren’t members yet so they lack veto power. Your comments around rich alumni being an issue sort of falls apart when you think of your school and tOSU. I think you are losing the plot a little. This is now about brands. Oregon is a massive draw and a natural rival to SC given resources commitment and fan loyalty. Why would you toss Oregon over the side? It isn’t the equivalent of Texas Tech or Oklahoma State

No, they don’t want to set off an implosion of the PAC without perfect information on ND. My guess is they have 3 in mind and are just waiting to see if the fourth is needed or not

Stanford seems a logical choice over Cal but I wonder (hope?) the latter get the nod given its relationship to UCLA. Or maybe they find a way to snag both. IDK

What else are they going to say? I assure you, the level of trust between these members is really really low. They know Oregon isn’t staying in a plussed up version of the Big West or whatever it’s called. and they know Oregon would rather commit seppuku than join the Big XII And they know Oregon is the next most valuable piece on the board behind ND (note: this assumes the ACC teams cannot be pried out from that league which seems pretty reasonable) IOW, they aren’t staying or merging. They are just waiting for things to move along a little further. So I think the PAC disappears in 2-3 weeks when Arizona and/or Utah schools bolt rather than wait for Oregon and UW to administer the death blow It is going to be excruciating to wait and the commitment news could get dicey between now and then but Oregon (and UW) will be OK

That isn’t what will happen. They need ND to make a call so they know if they are inviting 3 or 4 from the PAC. They (rightly) assume neither Oregon or UW is going to panic jump to the Big XII. If they take Oregon and Washington now that sets off a domino that dissolves the conference and leaves them either w/out Bay Area presence because Cal and/or Furd will possibly have acted. They probably feel comfortable knowing the SEC is also waiting on ND so there is no risk of the SEC swooping in to snag any schools (should they want to) that would disrupt the B1G’s next move. TL;DR the B1G feels relatively comfortable that Oregon and UW are safely in place until the ND domino falls. They have no pressure to act before then which means we may be hanging fire for some time

I would be pretty shocked if Oregon was viewed as dilutive on its own or w/UW Clearly B1G is waiting on ND’s decision before adding more. Wonder if SEC is doing same. Be curious if SEC even wants a west coast footprint or are happy being as far west as Texas and OK. If they are happy to stay there then Oregon’s bargaining power drops quite a bit. The question is really: what do these guys see as the final total and are they willing to eject existing members? So, if the number is 20 and you are the B1G you have four slots to go unless you jettison a school or two. You want ND so really that leaves 3 slots you can attack until ND makes their decision known. Would you rather wait to see if some of the jewels in the ACC come loose sooner than later? If not the Oregon gets the call. Or you assume 24 is the final number and go to 20 now knowing the inevitable dissolution of the ACC will bring 4 more in which case you give SC and UCLA some geographical support. That same thought exercise with the SEC might have them waiting in the wings to get 4 ACC schools and then staying at 20 for as long as possible which means they would NOT look west because they want to keep those slots open. IOW, it’s a mess.

That would be an odd move to let the P10 merge with the B12. Why let the 6th, 11th, 12th, and 21st media markets go elsewhere ahead of media negotiations?

If the B1G let the Seattle (Oregon as well given ties to UW) and Bay Area media markets fall to the Big 12 then I would have to say they are abject morons. Seattle is a T15 market and if you add a sorry Rutgers for some weak hold on the NY media market I have no idea how you don’t scoop up the value Said another way, what’s the value in letting those media markets die/go somewhere else for another decade?

Seattle is a top 15 market and Oregon has a bigger fan base than SC. IOW, UO and UW have real media value and probably travel as a pair. By kicking the stool out from under the conference they leave no choice for those schools to leave If you are the B1G are you really only having two west coast teams?

Das is das end

Curious that they would strand the Bay Area and PNW

Two comments as I wanted to make two fundamentally different points. There is a need for a structured pay for play rule and a GM function to manage the school’s $$ pool. With a few exceptions, the current NIL pay for play payouts won’t be drawn from an unlimited account if you will (see below for why) As a school, I would want to get out in front of this because these boosters will undoubtedly start acting like irate investors. Irate boosters, nursing enough as they are today, can easily morph into a gadfly like Ichan to force the coaches to map to their vision ‘or else.’ The chaos and pressure that will put on staffs and the ADs will be off the charts insane. Right now this is straight pay to play so you can’t solve without running afoul of the regulations (how can coaches liaise with boosters on targets as that is flat out directing money). The schools have a vested interest in getting some sort of salary cap in place and can probably do so by letting players form a union so there is some collective bargaining structure in place. That’s fully legal. If the players get sponsorships, fine, but that is tightly controlled so it isn’t pay for play but with a innocuous brand. Then schools hire a GM to manage their salary cap.

It’s an interesting decision process I would imagine. Getting to the NFL is no sure thing so you want to pick a program that will optimize the chances for that outcome (development and opportunity to showcase and use skills). OTOH, a $9.5MM payday may be a better financial decision given the above mentioned risks. If you hit on both, well, mazel! I would be curious to know how the kid thought about this decision especially considering MC has no real credible track record of developing QBs to an NFL level game (he inherited Herbert pretty much developed as we all know) If I were advising kids, this is the formula I would use: NIL in hand vs success rate of developing NFL QBs * average draft payout of average slot drafted

@Charles Fischer I would hope by this point you would know that dogs now (rightfully) own the GIF and meme world.

I love the fact they refuse to give kudos for hiring Lanning. Dude was a highly sought after hire and the Ducks managed to dodge the Wilcox bullet (still having trouble that they even went this route but…) and have someone who - so far - is doing all the right things, big and small

Well, Cal is a yes. Obvs.

For those questioning the value of the Alliance, it’s what you didn’t see that is what you should use as a measuring stick. Sankey is a crafty bully who is totally in the tank for ESPN. His goal is to renew their stranglehold on the CFP because doing so denies his competitors outside the B1G revenue (smaller pie of which the SEC disproportionately owns) Hence the attempt to land a CFP expansion by fiat which in turn likely allows ESPN to exercise their ROFR. The Alliance put the brakes on all of that. Kliavkoff strikes me as an insanely savvy operator and more than a match for the likes of Sankey. The SEC is not in a position of power so long as the Alliance holds. It’s all bluster and Sankey knows this as does Kliavkoff I suspect. The SEC isn’t going to do their own thing because that is suicide. Sankey is posturing to look as big as possible because he knows that, given current course and speed, he is dancing to the tempo of the Alliance I know this reads as counterintuitive given the SEC’s brand but they are in a weak position at the moment

In-state talent can cut both ways. Some love the idea of playing close to home and others love the idea of getting away from the known and familiar. I grew up in LA and the idea of going to school anywhere in SoCal was beyond unappealing.

I wasn’t as turned off by this take. Notice what was conspicuously absent throughout that monologue: coaching skills. “Tearing it up” perhaps implies a positive view of MC’s skills (and perhaps the ‘not Nick Saban’ comment as well) but he missed a ton of opportunities to explicitly say that. Example, wouldn’t ‘good coach’ be on that list of check boxes? IDK, I saw that video as a total hedge rather than an anointing of a soon to be dominant coaching reign

Actually, merging w/the B12 doesn’t sound so crazy. You would own ½ of the US geographic footprint from a media perspective.

No, 80 plays is utterly unrealistic. At the same time, I don’t really believe anyone on the staff thinks otherwise. It is an aspirational metric. I suspect the true KPI is in the 60s

Focus less on star ratings, which aren’t exactly objective, and more on fit. Not all 4 and 5 star recruits are equal in both actual ability and drive. The recruit ranking systems are no different than the US News college rankings: not mapped to true quality in many cases.