Stanford endowment is 36 billion... I think they'll work out whatever they want (which might not be to continue playing football, who knows).
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
CU has rejoined the Big 12 and broken college football - talking out asses continues
- Thread starter InTheBuff
- Start date
Stanford endowment is 36 billion... I think they'll work out whatever they want (which might not be to continue playing football, who knows).
ScreamingBeagle
Active Member
It's not about how much endowment you have. Nobody at Stanford is dipping into for football purposes. It's about cost benefit analysis for media partners.
If you have to backfill 4-6 schools where is the athletic money to pay exit fees for MWC? I am sure Stanford is just jumping at dipping into endowments for that.
The current exit fee for the PAC12 is 0$..
Nada. So at some point somebody has to be running the numbers and recognize it's cheaper to up the MWC yearly payouts, even double them to 10-12 million/year and move the rest of the PAC-12 over there.
Maybe your right. Maybe Stanford drops football before doing that, but networks are going to refuse to foot 60-150 million in exits fees to backfill the Pac12.
I recall Stanford seriously considering dropping football after losing to UC Davis before hiring Harbaugh.
In addition to the endowment, I think they have a few phone numbers they can call for a few shekels if they want wait things out as an independent, etc. They have 70+ living billionaire alumni.
Long story short, I think they will get something approaching what they want.
I am to say. If the conference had 16 teams with UT and OU, the TV contract would be much higher.... and the buyout to leave would be much bigger.
There is no way that the TV contract is an issue if you have UCLA, USC, UT, and OU.... thus no one leaves.
I believe Stanford would try life as an independent, see if the B1G comes calling as the only move back to an existing conference it would make.
They'll definitely push Rice & Tulane as new Pac members first. If the conference loses 4 instead of 2, things get challenging for Stanford with the affiliations.
Why not go Ivy? They aren’t trying to compete for Nattys
Sammy11
Well-Known Member
League distributions jump from under 40M to at least 44 if not 50M. TV getting an average of 31.7M starting in 2025 is a part of it.
Doesn't work at all for non football sports.
I'm not even sure WCC would want their non-football sports - other schools would have zero chance to seriously compete.
They could go independent in football, but finding a landing spot for their other sports would be tough. MWC, maybe - but MWC would recognize their bargaining position and likely demand football comes too.
Yep! SMU, Rice, and Tulane are easily sells. They know who their lower end contemporaries are. The fourth will be difficult. I would say it will be tough for a 4th school. Maybe USF (new AAU). Idk.
Any schools they add will have to value academics way more than sports. All four definitely do that but perception matters to Stanford and Cal and that hurts USF compared to the other three. Idk. Three is easy. Four, they will be looking deep. Since the PAC is going global and streaming, it's likely to care less about media market and more about economic markets. If the PAC really had their way, they would hit up the Ivies who have no interest or University of Chicago which also has no interest in sports like that. To Stanford and Cal, they do they have interest in sports compared to their contemporaries aka the Ivies.
The real outside the box 4th candidate would be UBC. (British Columbia - and if I remember right, they even have a football team).
The Ivies don't want the rules of the FBS on them. I reached out about this recently. They enjoy their freedom and they are fine exactly where they are.
They would have to gain entry into the NCAA system. I know there is one Canadian school in the NCAAs playing D2 or D3 but it's only one.
Stanford is absolutely trying to compete for national championships. They have a ton of them in general.
They nearly did it in football in 2015.
They've won the directors cup which is essentially a measure of winning national titles over and over and over.
Last edited:
1926 and 1940?? Come on man
I think they’d probably like to say they want to compete for National Championships, but they aren’t doing anything about it. Brian Kelly left a similar institution that we know is trying to win Nattys because as “close” as they’ve been, ND is actually very far away.
Academia is the priority and it’s not even close. Can’t win a Natty in todays CFB if that’s truly the priority.
The West Coast Conference just had BYU as a member for over a decade and BYU has bigger facilities than what Stanford has. The endow money is overblown when it comes to athletics.
I don’t think the WCC would pass on adding Stanford & Cal.
Oregon is having discussions about going the independent route from what I know. The WAC is an option for their non football sports and you can apply that to UW too. I don't think the MWC will make an exception when it comes to non football memberships.
FBS conferences I believe must have at least 8 schools to sponsor football. The PAC dropping football is a possibility while maintaining other sports.
Remember I have talked about the MVFC from the FBS? Schools from three different conference park their football teams in the best conference of FCS. The B12’s BY is already thinking about that next basketball only media rights deal.
Dare I say CU football ends up in a football conference like that yet has basketball in the B12?
I don’t think the WCC would pass on adding Stanford & Cal.
Oregon is having discussions about going the independent route from what I know. The WAC is an option for their non football sports and you can apply that to UW too. I don't think the MWC will make an exception when it comes to non football memberships.
FBS conferences I believe must have at least 8 schools to sponsor football. The PAC dropping football is a possibility while maintaining other sports.
Remember I have talked about the MVFC from the FBS? Schools from three different conference park their football teams in the best conference of FCS. The B12’s BY is already thinking about that next basketball only media rights deal.
Dare I say CU football ends up in a football conference like that yet has basketball in the B12?
Narrator: The Alabaster Yak doesn't understand that they are trying to win championships in sports other than football, and that it's actually helpful to be in a reasonably competitive conference if that's their aim.
None of the ivys are trying to win a women's lacrosse natty, and Stanford will actually have a hard time doing that from the WCC, or even the MWC, because you need to regularly play top competition is a natty is your goal.
Fair
Those two rank pretty closely actually.
- San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose (#10)
- Phoenix (Prescott) (#11)
- Seattle-Tacoma (#12)
- Denver (#16)
- Salt Lake City (#29)
Dont leave FOX out since they bought USC and UCLA. Money is ruining the game and tearing up tradition. It ruined the BXII too with the LHN ESPN fiasco
If the SEC and B1G divy up the ACC next I suspect most of the Pac will end up in the BXII having nowhere else to go but at least leaving three (2 and a half) substantial national conferences
That’s the problem, you have the resources to “ bump up a paid subscription” when most cannot. That is the problem w the media deal from what we are hearing.
That’s 12 yrs ago! live in the moment.
It seems to me like he is always right eventually. not immediately but eventually . I’m too lazy to go through it all but that is what it feels like to me
Trying and doing aren't the same, but I contend they are still trying.
Is Oregon not trying to win a national title in football just because they haven't yet?
Oregon will admit any recruit in the country they believe can get them there. Stanford’s admissions eliminates the vast majority of P5 level recruits, let alone the elite recruits required to win at that level. That’s the difference.
I was prepared to move on from CU athletics if a paid subscription was not going to be available for CU starting next year. Now there is going to be ESPN+ in the B12 and perhaps a Fox Sports equivalent unless Fox allows their stuff to be on ESPN+.
I would have not tolerated another six years of the P12N in its current form. I had zero interest in the PAC-10 before CU joined and I’m going to have zero interest in the new PAC unless CSU joined that conference. If the MWC had gone all in with ESPN+, I’d be watching AFA and the rest of the MWC kicking the crap out of CSU. MWC media rights expire after 2025-26 athletic season.
Right now the PAC is dead to me and I‘m moving over to the B12 effective immediately this year in addition to any CU contest I can watch.
It has probably been written, but one of my top reasons for being happy about the BigXII is that Yormack is our commissioner!
He will fight for us now
The bottom of the B1G is garbage, not sure how NW, Purdue, Illinois, Indiana are powerful brands, and of course you have the bottom of the bottom in Rutgers, Maryland and Nebraska
But not having Larry Scott or George Snuffaluffagus as our commissioners is a glorious change
He will fight for us now
The bottom of the B1G is garbage, not sure how NW, Purdue, Illinois, Indiana are powerful brands, and of course you have the bottom of the bottom in Rutgers, Maryland and Nebraska
But not having Larry Scott or George Snuffaluffagus as our commissioners is a glorious change
This move to the Big 12 is indeed bittersweet.