Jon Wilner: Stanford & Cal Need a Safety Net Now as FSU Lawsuit Continues | Pac-12 

I'd say they're more culpable

I'd say more so. They were the approving body for his decisions, maybe even pushed him into some decisions.

Plus ESPN, for double-dealing the Pac while paying the Big12 thirty million a year for each Pac12 team they poached.

Stanford almost got a B1G invite last year, but the TV networks vetoed it. Stanford has the No. 1 all-sports athletic department in the nation, and was very good at football not that long ago (102 wins and 10 straight bowl games form 2009-2018, with 5 Heisman finalists.)

Virginia was one of the worst P5 teams in the country last season. North Carolina is no football power either -- Stanford has done better this century than either of them. Miami has been pretty mediocre for a long time too.

@@atgdcommish608 expansion is no longer about what you did 20 years ago or what market you play in. It's about viewership and brand. Virginia is rarely brought up in expansion talk. The largest targets are Notre Dame (obviously) North Carolina (their brand is huge and their viewership is decent) FSU, Clemson, and Miami. The only time you EVER hear Virginia brought up in expansion talk is when it's about the SEC and it's only because after North Carolina, it's the only original "Southern State" that the SEC won't have a team in. Virginia doesn't bring value to anyone. Their viewership numbers are lousy and it would be the same dumb argument that the ACC used for Boston College and the B1G used for Rutgers: "It brings in a large television market." Which would be great if anyone in said market gave a damn about them.

@@trclark7689 UVA is a rare upper right flagship still in play. Things seem to have gone dark with the Virginia schools.

ESPN isn't going to extend their deal with Clemson and FSU gone. At this point, with the idea that Clemson and FSU will ultimately settle within the next year, there's zero chance that ESPN extends their deal. At the absolute best case, Cal and Stanford have a good deal through 2027. After that, they're screwed.

@@trclark7689 ACC TV Contract LITERALLY SAYS the contract cannot be DECREASED in PAYOUT as long as the ACC maintains at least 15 schools. It LITERALLY SAYS that even if ALL 15 of the schools in the ACC when the Contract was signed LEFT IT... that as long as they were replaced with 15 schools the Contract would not be DECREASED in PAYOUT. The ACC will not diminish financially until after 2036 at worst. Plus, the ACC Network and their TV Contract will both INCREASE because of their Expansion into California and Texas (and future Expansion that is on the way) by more than $30 Million per school in the next 5 to 7 years. YOU KNOW NOTHING TRUE ABOUT THE ACC So funny how in the dark FSU fans are based on the GREED and IDIOCY of your "LEADERSHIP" Just because they LIE about the ACC doesn't mean you should BELIEVE their LIES

@@user-kn7ry8iz6x the ACC gave ESPN the option to continue their television deal or opt out of it following the 2027 season. Originally, they had until 2021 to make their decision. Jim Phillips extended their deadline to renew to 2025. You can whine about it, you can cry about it, you can respond on RU-vid in an all-caps rant, but at the end of the day, that's what's happening and it's going to happen. When 4-6 schools leave this terrible conference, adding App State, East Carolina, Memphis, USF, and Tulane isn't going to help you. By the way, ESPN was pissed off when the ACC added Cal and Stanford. What good is "adding the California market" with two schools that no one watch? It was as bad a mistake as the ACC adding Boston College because it added that "great Boston market!" Please, don't let facts get in the way of your all-caps induced cry session.

@@trclark7689 "ESPN isn't going to extend their deal with Clemson and FSU gone." So arrogant. The BIG12 lost its top 6 (net). BTW... FSU may end up as a BIG12 tentpole.

CAL won't be in a conference with schools that don't agree with their ideology, so they will not join a conference with a school like BYU. They are also very high on academics and look down their nose at schools like WVU.

@@mattw7780then what? No place to go within 3 years

@@qz9514 ACC will be more than stable through 2036 and beyond. It is the Big 12 that is in trouble IF you know ALL of the FACTS. You obviously do not.

Why? They may prefer indy.

But they didn't because they knew they had a better offer worth 150% more $$$, better Markets, better Academics, a Home for more sports, a Conference Network, a Partnership with the 1 or the 2 largest & most valuable TV Sports Networks, a ready Transition plan into Streaming that doesn't sacrifice the Revenue of Today before Tomorrow gets here and on and on a on. They knew they had a better Home waiting. So they let everyone else take the risks of getting sued by the PAC2 and only left after they were in the clear.

SMU will never get in the Big12. Not now for sure.

ACC is not going to DIE. Getting rid of some AHOLES is a GOOD THING.

@@user-kn7ry8iz6x no, it's going to die. It may still "exist" but it won't exist as a power conference. Yormark was smart to jump in front of the PAC to get his TV deal. When USC/UCLA announced their decision to leave, that was the death blow for the PAC. Schools couldn't afford to take the terrible television deals that were available for them and the same will happen to the ACC once Clemson and Florida State leave. Clemson and Florida State are the two revenue producing schools in the ACC. ESPN can (and will) nuke their television deal following the 2027 season. Why would ESPN want to pay what they're paying for the collection of stiffs that'll be left in the ACC? Do you think North Carolina and Miami will want to stick around for $20 million a year once the ACC has to find a new network partner? Or at a minimum, keep the partner they have on a significantly reduced revenue number? ESPN is already pissed off at the ACC for adding Cal and Stanford, they bring no value but ESPN will have to pay the conference an additional fee for both schools. Once Clemson and FSU leave, it's going to open the door for UNC, Miami, and Virginia, then the Big 12 will probably poach Duke, Louisville, NC State, and Pitt. Then what? You think the ACC is going to stay together with Cal, BC, Georgia Tech, SMU, Stanford, Virginia Tech, and Wake Forest? With a lucrative enough television deal?

a) In context, the BIG12 is already dead. b) The BIG12 is already too wide, too large, and too Texas c) If the ACC doesn't survive as a Tier 2, neither it nor the BIG12 will be relevant. d) CLEMSON likely doesn't have an SEC invite if UNC can't go with. The ACC should easily survive as a Tier 2 with lite depletion. Tough to tolerate FSU arrogance and delusion, so stopping here.

Why? The ACC will deplete down to the Tier 2 level with the BIG12. Smaller regionals with some unifying brand/culture makes more since for that level.

Under that scenario, the BIG12 is then irrelevant. How will its next contact look?

STANFORD/CAL are terrible fits for the BIG12. The 4Cs were obviously the best PAC 4-bloc for the new BIG12.

The BIG12 has already imploded. Rather stable unless it continues to expand.

What are you talking about? The Big12 is solid. No one is coming back to a half-ass rebuilt PAC and certainly none from the Big12 which is not imploding and ACC is not going to implode either.

@@michaelwall3393 The Big 12 IS imploding. It will lose 5 to 8 teams MINIMUM in the next 5 years. But it will recover with the Top of the G5's and still be the 4th Best Conference.

There’s absolutely a real chance the B1G gets Stanford and Cal for pennies on the dollar. Even a 1/5 share in the B1G is more than they are getting in the ACC.

As a Cal Alum how to be move to Big 10 after we joined ACC

@@paulvarnellThe BIG isn't taking them even on a free ride like SMU is giving the ACC. They could have already had them for cheap if they wanted them and Cal and Stanford aren't going to grow their brand playing on the east coast in front of fans that don't care about them.

@@paulvarnellnot gonna happen. They are two of the weakest brands in major college football. They both are elite academically and in research which is BIG in the BIG10 yet they were told no thanks and passed on. What has changed? Nothing. If the BIG expands it’s going to be into places like Florida, Texas, North Carolina, and maybe Virginia.

Big12 would be more likely, but I don't see that likely I'd say go to the mwc and make the best of that, pac west?

Oregon and Washington were priced at 50% shares by the B10. Stanford and Cal would probably get 25%

How you can say that and NOT SEE how ESPN's Investment in the ACC GUARANTEES it will remain strong is laughable. You should try getting some FACTS about what the ACC INCOME is and what their TV Contract REALLY SAYS... not the LIES you have heard from FSU, the B1G and Big 12.

@@icu17siberia Which means Stanford and CAL are currently being paid 10% MORE than Oregon and Washington... but to sweeten the pot to get into the ACC they are only collecting 30% of what Oregon and Washington are collecting.

Problem solved for whom?

Why?

@@tarheel7406 | travel pod with the new ACC 3 will be the simplest solution.

not sure they could sustain the increased trade costs. It's nearly P12 money with increased expenses. They'd have the same dilemma in the B10

@icu17siberia | With that logic the same can be said for the big twelve right? I mean, traveling from West Virginia and Cincinnati and Orlando to Arizona.Utah and colorado is just as expensive