Do Cards want Cal & the Tree @ the ACC (all things considered)?
- Thread starter 12375CAT
- Start date
Yes. More teams helps to stabilize the conference & secure more media rights. As the westernmost member of the ACC, travel to the West Coast isn’t as difficult for Louisville as it may be for others.
Sorry- in these parts “Cal” usually refers to a certain basketball coach we call “the squid”. I just remembered that Stanford had a tree in their logo for some reason.
Because they used to the Indians. They were among the first to change their nicknames.
I realize that. Heck, I can remember when they were the Stanford Indians. I just don’t know what a tree has to do with “Cardinal”.
Northern California is renown for its huge redwood trees.
On one hand, the cultural differences in the west coast are significant as compared to those here in the Commonwealth ……. but there are very few differences with the culture inside the UL Administration. I believe that most view Stanford at the same Academic level as Vanderbilt, but consider it’s football program equal to any school in the SEC, not named Alabama or UGA.
At this point in time, the addition of Stanford in my mind is a positive step for a conference that is struggling to maintain relevance …….. I support the expansion move.
On one hand, the cultural differences in the west coast are significant as compared to those here in the Commonwealth ……. but there are very few differences with the culture inside the UL Administration. I believe that most view Stanford at the same Academic level as Vanderbilt, but consider it’s football program equal to any school in the SEC, not named Alabama or UGA.
At this point in time, the addition of Stanford in my mind is a positive step for a conference that is struggling to maintain relevance …….. I support the expansion move.
Me neither.
FWIW you will soon have another Card fan in Beantown. Eldest grandson just signed a lease in Dorchester/Southie.
He’s wicked smaaat. That’s a growing area. Actually I moved to Connecticut several years ago but kept the handle since I had had it so long. Got a daughter in East Boston near Logan Airport, though. Great city.
He's Boston born and Connecticut reared so he's used to it. He loves the area. Great city. The family is excited for him.
Cheers!
If it means more $$, I'd be interested. Otherwise, no...
Exactly. And I don’t see any way the conference gets extra money for those three schools.
I really don’t care what happens as long as Louisville stays in a P5 conference so they can recruit.
It appears ACC is willing to let this play out and see what Stanford and Cal are willing to take share wise. Stanford can probably afford to take a small share for several years. If Cal does the same then I think it is fine.
Let’s do it. At this point in time it’s far better to be adding than to be losing. Doing nothing seems like resigning our fate to become fodder for more B2G and SEC expansion at the expense of our conference.
Plus, it's not like this will be a permanent move. More realignment will occur. Might as well do something now as opposed to nothing.
If that was the goal the Big Ten should have just absorb the Pac 10. If Stanford and Cal are willing to take a cut why not add them because they fit academically. It cuts travel cost.
2 super conferences isn’t enough.
2 super conferences isn’t enough.
I’m just not sure where it ends if it ends. I think it’s safe to say that the $ec and the Big10 aren’t going away.
I guess it would end with just two teams, or they might just have AI games and dispense with players, coaches, etc. money would be derived from viewing and gambling.
I read an article recently that said the Contract with ESPN requires them to pay more if more teams are added to the conference. It also said Stanford and SMU were willing to accept greatly reduced league amounts for the first five years in the League. That would allow the League to pay the existing members more than they are currently scheduled to receive.
I think the League needs to be very careful and really study this hard. There is no reason to rush because there is really no place else for Stanford, Cal, and SMU to go that is better than the ACC. Take your time and get to the right answer.
I think the League needs to be very careful and really study this hard. There is no reason to rush because there is really no place else for Stanford, Cal, and SMU to go that is better than the ACC. Take your time and get to the right answer.
Yeah if have to see that goof ball dancing around in a Christmas Tree again I’m going to puke. I think it’s the most ridiculous of all mascots.
Ok this is their first I heard this, because everyone else is reporting the current pot would have to be split more ways. In that case I’m not as negative towards those teams entering except the fact their California teams
Honestly we’ve been through this before and it reeks of desperation. Remember the Big East adding Boise and San Diego State before it fell apart?
Just be patient and let’s see what we can do in 3-4 years. The Big 12 deal is for 5 years? We can poach if we can hold on to our top teams.
Add Oklahoma State, Baylor, WVU, and figure out who the other best fit would be? WVU has natural rivalries with Pitt, WVU, and us. Oklahoma State and Baylor are great programs and add a lot more area to your map.
I guess the next addition is all about who makes sense? Do you add Cincy to get into Ohio? TCU is actually in Dallas? Kansas would bolster basketball?
We can make a better conference if we attack when we are ready.
Just be patient and let’s see what we can do in 3-4 years. The Big 12 deal is for 5 years? We can poach if we can hold on to our top teams.
Add Oklahoma State, Baylor, WVU, and figure out who the other best fit would be? WVU has natural rivalries with Pitt, WVU, and us. Oklahoma State and Baylor are great programs and add a lot more area to your map.
I guess the next addition is all about who makes sense? Do you add Cincy to get into Ohio? TCU is actually in Dallas? Kansas would bolster basketball?
We can make a better conference if we attack when we are ready.
Conference realignment has been driven by TV executives, so it all depends on what ESPN says. If we can get more $$$$ then great. If not then no. The only thing that will move the needle for the ACC at this point is if we could add Notre Dame.
If the question is what value does adding Stanford do for UL, I would ask the same question as to what value does WF, VT or NCST for that matter do for us? How many UL fans travel to Syracuse or Miami by car? In truth it is all about TV, and as for me, I would be just as interested in watching Stanford and UL play on TV, as I would some of the other existing ACC members.
SMU makes some sense on its own. The other 2 a few time zones away have to really justify the finances. At this point, all that is being reported is a short-term windfall for those schools willing to give up their rights/shares for a few years just to get a landing spot. But the TV deal, which only adds $10M for each additional P5 team, actually dilutes everyone's share in the long run. I frankly do not understand why UofL is one of the schools in favor since it is most likely to be put in the "western" division or pod if all 3 proposed schools are added, making things logistically more difficult for all of our sports team and fans. And for less money in the long run.
The current NC collection of UNC, Duke, WF and NCST in the ACC is dominating the entire conference in terms of any decisions. Adding any schools with viable sports programs and respectable academic standing west of UL would ultimately bring a much needed balance. I believe that explains why those opposed to expansion are unwilling to support it. Once the number of members starts to increase, those voting against lose their influence. Despite being well south of NC, FSU does not want to dilute their influence in the existing ACC system.
I read that it`s a done deal with SMU, Stanford and Cal joining the ACC, just working out the details. From what I understand NC, Clemson and Florida State voted against it, but it only takes a 75% vote. Clemson and FS has been asking for a bigger piece of the pie, so I understand their vote. This may also escalate their desire to exit the ACC.
U of L should be voting with the big football interests in the ACC on everything, whoever they are and whatever the issue is.
The rest of the conference will sink it otherwise...
The rest of the conference will sink it otherwise...
FSU hasn't brought crap to the ACC for awhile on a consistent basis. Sooooooo they can just kiss my UofL ass. If they want to move on then so be it. Same for Clemson. In reality, neither of them bring THAT MUCH to the table. But that's just my opinion.
GO CARDS!!!
GO CARDS!!!
In football, Clemson brings ALL the credibility. FSU has some history, as does Miami.
In regards to Clemson and FSU this is a case of be careful what you wish for. Either of those teams going to the SEC or B1G and they would never be in the playoffs again. They would end up like Nebraska as a has been, FSU hasn’t done anything since 2013 so they need to step up. Why is UNCST so cocky they have never done anything in any sport with the exception of one basketball title over 20 years ago.
The only problem with the ACC is Notre Dame, Miami, FSU and VT haven’t been great. Clemson can’t be the only great team. It doesn’t take many but you have to have more then 1. Louisville can’t be dog shit like it has been with Petrino and Satterfield. They have to be good most years and great on occasion.
Money will start flowing in when those top programs turn it around. It will bring the others up with it.
Money will start flowing in when those top programs turn it around. It will bring the others up with it.
