Cal isn’t at the same level as Stanford in the vast majority of sports. Cal has struggled to bring in top recruits for many sports for quite a while now.
I expect Stanford recruiting has slowed right now because the top recruits who Stanford would be interested in always have other options. And right now, other options may look better to those athletes.
I’m sure there are plenty of athletes who would still go to Stanford, but not at the highest of levels that Stanford is generally taking in many of these sports.
The top recruits in women’s lacrosse, to take your example, all who would be national level talents, do not want to be playing in the MWC next year. Hopefully Stanford’s situation becomes clear in the next few weeks.
There are plenty of schools for athletes who have Olympic aspirations to compete. I certainly don’t have all the answers.
I do think that Stanford still ends up in one of the remaining Power 4 conferences, but who knows if that will happen, and what the timing would be. The two sports you mention aren’t as affected as some other sports by the geographic distance issue of being in the ACC (or any other conference requiring greater travel distances than they’ve had to date) because they don’t typically have meets during the week.
Perhaps the PAC conference survives, but will it still be a ‘power’ conference? Will the media revenues be enough so that Stanford doesn’t have to cut sports? Who knows?
If they don’t get into one of the 4 remaining power conferences, why wouldn’t an athlete with Olympic aspirations want go to a school in a strong conference? I also expect some Stanford coaches will leave if Stanford isn’t able to get in strong conference.
The first is from a chat board - but I’ve read the same thing a few times.
The link below that is a recent proposal with more info. Not sure why the Ivy would be interested in moving to FBS. It would defy their mission or they’d have to expand their admissions to find even more kids that have need. Frankly, it makes no sense. They’re not interested in offering athletic scholarships. It’s against the mission. I could never imagine it happening in my lifetime.
The second link is an article but an entire conference or 10 teams looking to transition.
1.Sponsor a minimum of 16 varsity intercollegiate sports, including football, based on the minimum sports sponsorship and scheduling requirements set forth in Bylaw 20. Sponsorship shall include a minimum six sports involving all male teams or mixed teams (males and females), and a minimum of eight varsity intercollegiate teams involving all female teams. Institutions may use up to two emerging sports to satisfy the required eight varsity intercollegiate sports involving all female teams. [Bylaw 20.9.7.1]
Schedule and play at least 60 percent of its football contests against members of Football Bowl Subdivision. Institutions shall schedule and play at least five regular season home contests against Football Bowl Subdivision opponents. [Bylaw 20.9.7.2]
Average at least 15,000 in actual or paid attendance for all home football contests over a rolling two-year period. [Bylaw 20.9.7.3]
Provide an average of at least 90 percent of the permissible maximum number of overall football grants-in-aid per year over a rolling two-year period. [Bylaw 20.9.7.4-(a)]
Annually offer a minimum of 200 athletics grants-in-aid or expend at least four million dollars on grants-in-aid to student-athletes in athletics programs. [Bylaw 20.9.7.4-(b)]
After that, there are requirements that schools must meet to be in FBS, including average number of fans per game and offering a certain number and $ amount in athletic scholarships….the Ivies provide no athletic scholarships as we know, and I expect they all fail on the average attendance numbers too.
Long ago, the Ivies were a top-level league in football. Prior to about 1925 they won a whole bunch of national championships.
I figured the talent gap would be large at first – it would take time to catch up to the lesser D1 leagues, and a little longer than that to compete with the Big Four (remaining) leagues.
But – if they did start giving schollies, I bet they could get some top talent. How hard could it be to sell an Ivy League education? Of course – reconciling that with their admissions standards might be a hurdle. Some of the top talent score under 20 on their ACTs and carry GPAs under 3.0 in high school – would the Ivies compromise their values? Or would they simply try to cherry-pick the very best football players they can get who have ACTs at least up near 30, GPAs of 3.6 or better, etc.?
For discussions regarding conference membership within the FBS and among the Power5 nothing else matters. Television contracts drive these discussions and football drives television contracts. This is why Notre Dame is in the ACC for everything except football. Independent they have the biggest television contract of all.
Stanford has three concerns; money, academic compatibility, and their Olympic sports programs. In the short term money isn’t the main driver but it matters medium to long term. The Big10 is likely the best overall fir but looking at what is possible right now the ACC is the best fit except for geography. Cal is in a bad spot right now, they have huge athletics related debt, mediocre teams, and a media market which is large but not super sports focused for college sports. They need to try and ride Stanford’s coattails if possible. OSU and WSU need to just resign themselves to a non-Power 5 conference and a huge cut in revenue as they really have nothing to offer in this discussion.
UFlorida and UTexas would be at the top of mind, since they’re usually at the top of the NCAA in Track and Field results. Washington, Harvard, UGA, Oregon, LSU, etc. as well.
Well, the Big 12 WAS considering Gonzaga and UConn, because they’re elite basketball schools, but ultimately the Big 12 went with AZ schools, CU and Utah due to football. the B1G was looking at Kansas because of basketball, but went with the west coast schools due to football.
So, I’d argue basketball matters, to an extent, but football is certainly numero uno.
I’ve seen comments by both Chip Kelly (UCLA head football coach) and either the Nebraska coach or athletic director floating the idea of separating football from other sports. It may be the best answer:
UConn is a potentially ascending football program. It has more merit than the Zags. UMASS could fit too I suppose. The ACC could raise its awful football program.
Brett Yormark is a brilliant executive, a master chess player it seems.
At the same time I wouldn’t believe everything I’ve read.
But if Gonzaga came on for hoops only, the $$ would be minimal to what the football teams are paid.
Gonzaga’s ascent to the top of the hoops world is like nothing we’ve seen - that quickly and for so long. So it makes sense to study. But it didn’t happen - yet and if it did, it might be their death. Big difference between the WCC and Big 12 in day to day competition. But there’s really only one Gonzaga - no one else like that. Maybe they are picked up by the new Pac whatever but those remaining teams really add no more value than those in the mountain west. More but not that much more - except maybe the Cardinal.
The fact remains - this is all about football. Why else are USC and UCLA in the B10? If you want to say 98.5%, I can live with it
I think the other risk for Washington State and Oregon State is long term relevance as schools of choice.
The reality of big sport schools are many are supported admission wise based on big time athletics. The reality is some, many kids go to a Bama or LSU or Ohio State or many others because they want to be able to interact with big time sports. I want to Syracuse in part because I loved Pearl Washington.
So that’s a risk, especially to the two schools whose national reps aren’t at the premium level.
They’re not going to extinction of course but maybe they’ll see less apps or lower stats in the student body - not immediately but over time as their names are seen less often.
Basketball is the icing on the cake but it is an extra.
UConn is the case study for this one with a growing football program under the Randy Edsall in the Big East but once realignment started rolling because of TV money the Big East (maybe the best ever hoops conference top to bottom) came apart and UConn was left at the altar. They have been on the outside trying to get in ever since those dark days.
And now UCONN has Jim Mora to try and bring football credibility back. This year they play 3 ACC teams in football.
An interesting comparison - when there was talk of Big 12 implosion a decade plus ago - Oklahoma and Texas were heading to the PAC 10 it appeared and bringing others - it was KU, amongst others, that were rumored to be left with only the MountainWest as a conference savior. The storied hoops team and it’s as storied as just about any hoops team -was not desired by the PAC 10…
Interesting now that whereas the PAC 10 tried to conquer the Big 12 that the Big 12 has conquered and flat out flattened the PAC 10 from any semblance of competitiveness.
You can keep saying it over and over and over, the mantra that “only football matters,” but the fact remains there are 20-30 +/- sports that have revenues, expenses, assets and liabilities, which are budgeted and accounted for every year for every athletic department.
In my view, they all matter, and certainly for the athletes that play and have scholarships.
And UCLA obviously brings a storied basketball history and continues to have one of the top basketball programs in the US.
Additionally, Bronny James will play for USC this season, assuming he’s fully recovered from his heart attack, which news reports say he is with no affect to his future career. The crowds will come out for Bronny James, everywhere he goes, they did for his AAU amd HS career.
While Bronny James was a nice story, he was not signed when the deal was done. I’ll venture to say he has zero to do with the merger or television contract value. He’s a nice story and I certainly hope he’s ok from his cardiac arrest. It’s far too young for a young man to suffer. He’s a nice one or two year story if he’s able to play before he leaves - and well, you and I can agree to disagree and that’s fine.
No one says there aren’t other sports. And that those sports don’t have revenues. But at the majority of schools, the majority of sports don’t come remotely close revenue wise to cover expenses.
Why did the merger happen - not a future, unknown recruit.
For the Big 10, it’s a huge market opened up and the spreading of its brand - just like when it took Rutgers to break into NY and UMD to tackle DC/Baltimore. Still shaking my head at Rutgers over a Syracuse - but that’s probably my SU bias as an alum but they’re a much bigger NYC draw than Rutgers.
From the LA Times: For UCLA, It turns out money was the motivating factor behind UCLA moving to the Big Ten. But it wasn’t just another case of greed and profit, but one of real need. UCLA was about to cut sports. UCLA was looking at the possibility of cutting almost half its sports programs. UCLA was running out of money hand over fist — until the Big Ten came along.
Fun topic and we all think differently and that’s fine. Where did @Mwfan1921 go
